politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay falls further behind Corbyn in latest YouGov favourabilit

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » TMay falls further behind Corbyn in latest YouGov favourability ratings

Follow @MSmithsonPB // < ![CDATA[ // < ![CDATA[ xfunction(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); // ]]>

Read the full story here

Ishmael_Z

Boris = history. And quite right too.

Ishmael_Z

I second my own motion, to guard against Vanilla eating it.

El_Capitano

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

TheScreamingEagles

From these figures we can probably infer the Labour lead is greater than the 3% headline figure.

Poor Boris, I did advise you all to keep laying him as next PM/Tory leader.

Pulpstar

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

Net unfavourable rating amongst 'remain' voters.

Brutal.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/930445586574331904

DavidL

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

SouthamObserver

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Morris_Dancer

Not huge moves. Corbyn's line moves less than May's. Probably good for the Conservatives if (and it's a great big 'if') they can get someone sensible to replace her.

TheScreamingEagles

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Well I look forward to driving a British Leyland car, my father says you haven't lived until you've driven an Austin Allegro.

Richard_Nabavi

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Again one has to distinguish 'no deal' from 'no trade deal'. They are quite different things, and the media and politicians should not conflate the two.

But yes, you are right that the car industry is the major sector which has most to lose from Brexit. That has been obvious since well before the referendum.

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Again one has to distinguish 'no deal' from 'no trade deal'. They are quite different things, and the media and politicians should not conflate the two.

But yes, you are right that the car industry is the major sector which has most to lose from Brexit. That has been obvious since well before the referendum.

I still do wonder what Mrs May offered Nissan.

MarkHopkins

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

Richard_Nabavi

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Again one has to distinguish 'no deal' from 'no trade deal'. They are quite different things, and the media and politicians should not conflate the two.

But yes, you are right that the car industry is the major sector which has most to lose from Brexit. That has been obvious since well before the referendum.

I still do wonder what Mrs May offered Nissan.

Something she can't deliver, I expect.

FF43

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Again one has to distinguish 'no deal' from 'no trade deal'. They are quite different things, and the media and politicians should not conflate the two.

But yes, you are right that the car industry is the major sector which has most to lose from Brexit. That has been obvious since well before the referendum.

What's the difference as far as the car industry is concerned? And how are we likely to get a deal without a trade deal?

anothernick

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Along with most other industries, agriculture and quite a bit of services as well.

Project fear were wrong - it will be much worse than they predicted.

Scott_P

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well I look forward to driving a British Leyland car, my father says you haven't lived until you've driven an Austin Allegro.

Been there, done that. Square steering wheel and all.

TheScreamingEagles

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Again one has to distinguish 'no deal' from 'no trade deal'. They are quite different things, and the media and politicians should not conflate the two.

But yes, you are right that the car industry is the major sector which has most to lose from Brexit. That has been obvious since well before the referendum.

I still do wonder what Mrs May offered Nissan.

Something she can't deliver, I expect.

I reckon if they pull out of the/relocate from the UK that might be a tipping point for Mrs May and her government.

The vox pops from Sunderland will be interesting.

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

Part of the reason for electing Strong and Cable was that his Twickenham constituency was within easy reach of all the major media studios in London !!

JonathanD

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Even with some sort of FTA deal, i suspect there is little long term future for international car manufacturers basing themselves in the UK to export to the EU. Car manufacturing is too political for a company to not have a national government backing them up where all the regulatory decisions are made. Plant will be ran down in the UK, with little new investment.

SouthamObserver

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

That's the spirit.

FF43

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

What are those dirty tricks?

FrancisUrquhart

TheScreamingEagles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Well I look forward to driving a British Leyland car, my father says you haven't lived until you've driven an Austin Allegro.

With Corbynism on the rise, it won't be long...

TheScreamingEagles

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

If only someone had warned that Vote Leave's have cake and eat it approach was bollocks.

SouthamObserver

Rachel Reeves is very smart. No surprise the Corbynistas don't want her anywhere near the Labour front bench.

PClipp

Morris_Dancer said:

Not huge moves. Corbyn's line moves less than May's. Probably good for the Conservatives if (and it's a great big 'if') they can get someone sensible to replace her.

That`s a real challenge, isn`t it? After all, the best person they can come up with for Foreign Secretary is Boris Johnson. All the other Tory MPs are considered to be even worse. That takes some doing!

JonathanD

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

Grow up. Leave assured us a new trade deal would be easy and we'd have nothing to fear.

Scott_P

MarkHopkins said:

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

Still clinging to the "German car makers will force Merkel to give us a deal, they need us more than we need them" delusion all the way down I see.

DavidL

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

Part of the reason for electing Strong and Cable was that his Twickenham constituency was within easy reach of all the major media studios in London !!

I honestly wonder if he has been unwell. He has never been exactly shy about getting himself on the media before.

Richard_Nabavi

FF43 said:

What's the difference as far as the car industry is concerned? And how are we likely to get a deal without a trade deal?

'No deal' would be things like no agreement on vehicle type approval, meaning UK-built cars could not be legally sold in the EU from the day after Brexit. 'No trade deal' would mean that we amicably sorted out all that cliff-edge stuff, but reverted to WTO tariffs. The latter would still be a big problem for the car industry, mainly because of its impact on the just-in-time supply chain, but it wouldn't be total catastrophe like the former.

As to how likely the two possibilities are, it's an extremely good question, which commentators haven't really explored. I don't know the answer.

Scott_P

JonathanD said:

Grow up. Leave assured us a new trade deal would be easy

The easiest Trade Deal in history I believe...

IanB2

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

It's always someone else's fault; the pied pipers that led so many down this blind alley are never to blame.

Scott_P

Richard_Nabavi said:

As to how likely the two possibilities are, it's an extremely good question, which commentators haven't really explored. I don't know the answer.

@faisalislam: Honda’s Patrick Keating tells @CommonsBeis that they are getting messages that Europe will not allow VCA type approvals post-Brexit/ no deal

AlsoIndigo

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Again one has to distinguish 'no deal' from 'no trade deal'. They are quite different things, and the media and politicians should not conflate the two.

But yes, you are right that the car industry is the major sector which has most to lose from Brexit. That has been obvious since well before the referendum.

I still do wonder what Mrs May offered Nissan.

Something she can't deliver, I expect.

The UK exports approximately half a million cars a year to the EU. If government just put its hand in its pocket and compensated the industry at 1500 quid per car that would cost less than a billion pounds, yes I know WTO, but I am sure there are incentive schemes that would have the same value but not break the letter of those rules.

FF43

JonathanD said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Even with some sort of FTA deal, i suspect there is little long term future for international car manufacturers basing themselves in the UK to export to the EU. Car manufacturing is too political for a company to not have a national government backing them up where all the regulatory decisions are made. Plant will be ran down in the UK, with little new investment.

I suspect so too. You are either in the EU or you are cheap, like Morocco or Turkey. The UK will be neither.

DavidL

Would we not have a rather better basis for not accepting VCAs or CoPs from Germany, particularly in respect of VW, than they would for not accepting ours?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, the referendum didn't happen in isolation. For decades, British politicians triangulated, making sceptical noises loudly whilst signing away vetoes whenever they were asked for them. It worked well for the centre, both red and blue, but you can't triangulate when the choice is binary, and the alternative, whilst far more comfortable in the short term, would present its own serious long term problems.

A Remain vote would've been played as a green light for more integration. Right now we'd be discussing 'British leadership' in the EU Army, whether we should adopt the single currency and so on.

There'd be no danger of a cliff edge, but there would be the reality of a frog being slowly boiled.

It would've been better if we'd left earlier, and I'm not delighted with any of the credible options (as I've said before, I hesitated rather more than I expected before voting).

SouthamObserver

Scott_P said:

JonathanD said:

Grow up. Leave assured us a new trade deal would be easy

The easiest Trade Deal in history I believe...

German car manufacturers will demand a deal because they need us more than we need them. They'll be desperate for an agreement. Sunlit uplands.

AlsoIndigo

IanB2 said:

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

It's always someone else's fault; the pied pipers that led so many down this blind alley are never to blame.

The voters will see it as the EU being obstructive, that's the political reality never mind whose fault it really is, expect to see more union jacks and a swing to hard brexit in the polls

Beverley_C

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

I thought we were assured last week that an 11th hour deal would sort everything out? I recall the PB Leavers being most insistent about it.

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

Part of the reason for electing Strong and Cable was that his Twickenham constituency was within easy reach of all the major media studios in London !!

I honestly wonder if he has been unwell. He has never been exactly shy about getting himself on the media before.

He is 74 years old !

FF43

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

What's the difference as far as the car industry is concerned? And how are we likely to get a deal without a trade deal?

'No deal' would be things like no agreement on vehicle type approval, meaning UK-built cars could not be legally sold in the EU from the day after Brexit. 'No trade deal' would mean that we amicably sorted out all that cliff-edge stuff, but reverted to WTO tariffs. The latter would still be a big problem for the car industry, mainly because of its impact on the just-in-time supply chain, but it wouldn't be total catastrophe like the former.

As to how likely the two possibilities are, it's an extremely good question, which commentators haven't really explored. I don't know the answer.

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, the referendum didn't happen in isolation. For decades, British politicians triangulated, making sceptical noises loudly whilst signing away vetoes whenever they were asked for them. It worked well for the centre, both red and blue, but you can't triangulate when the choice is binary, and the alternative, whilst far more comfortable in the short term, would present its own serious long term problems.

A Remain vote would've been played as a green light for more integration. Right now we'd be discussing 'British leadership' in the EU Army, whether we should adopt the single currency and so on.

There'd be no danger of a cliff edge, but there would be the reality of a frog being slowly boiled.

It would've been better if we'd left earlier, and I'm not delighted with any of the credible options (as I've said before, I hesitated rather more than I expected before voting).

We had vetoes and opt outs on an EU army and the single currency, so no we wouldn't be having those discussions.

I'm looking forward to a hard/WTO Brexit, it will help force us to live within our means and take away all those needless tax credits to the working classes, they've had it too good for too long.

Pulpstar

Morris_Dancer said:

For decades, British politicians triangulated, making sceptical noises loudly whilst signing away vetoes whenever they were asked for them.

Same tactic has been pulled on immigration to be perfectly honest. Particularly by the Tories.

anothernick

AlsoIndigo said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

Again one has to distinguish 'no deal' from 'no trade deal'. They are quite different things, and the media and politicians should not conflate the two.

But yes, you are right that the car industry is the major sector which has most to lose from Brexit. That has been obvious since well before the referendum.

I still do wonder what Mrs May offered Nissan.

Something she can't deliver, I expect.

The UK exports approximately half a million cars a year to the EU. If government just put its hand in its pocket and compensated the industry at 1500 quid per car that would cost less than a billion pounds, yes I know WTO, but I am sure there are incentive schemes that would have the same value but not break the letter of those rules.

But the issue is the supply chain - car manufacturers bring in parts from all over the place and then assemble them here - some components go in and out of the UK several times before finally ending up as part of a finished car. If tariffs have to be paid every time and there are delays for customs and "safety checks" arranged by those friendly French customs officials the whole thing seizes up.

Scott_P

AlsoIndigo said:

The UK exports approximately half a million cars a year to the EU. If government just put its hand in its pocket and compensated the industry at 1500 quid per car that would cost less than a billion pounds, yes I know WTO, but I am sure there are incentive schemes that would have the same value but not break the letter of those rules.

Tariffs are not the issue if the cars can't legally be sold because they are not recognised.

@faisalislam: @CommonsBEIS MP presses SMMT’s Hawes on German car manufacturers thing: “To put it in context - 56% of our exports go to Europe - 7% of theirs come here”

Ishmael_Z

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

If only someone had warned that Vote Leave's have cake and eat it approach was bollocks.

The problem in a word is: infantility. Johnson, Verhofstadt, Farage and Barnier are behaving in a way which 20 years ago would have been unthinkable in a senior politician, because they have Twitter at their fingertips and the example of the POTUS to show how it's acceptable to use it. And the medium is the message here, and Twitter will bring us the disaster of the century because it has come down to a test of that arse Johnson's claim that the EU can whistle. I'd be happier with Blair and mandelson fronting our operation because I'd expect them to behave like adults.

Feck that sounds pompous, but it's true.

Pulpstar

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, the referendum didn't happen in isolation. For decades, British politicians triangulated, making sceptical noises loudly whilst signing away vetoes whenever they were asked for them. It worked well for the centre, both red and blue, but you can't triangulate when the choice is binary, and the alternative, whilst far more comfortable in the short term, would present its own serious long term problems.

A Remain vote would've been played as a green light for more integration. Right now we'd be discussing 'British leadership' in the EU Army, whether we should adopt the single currency and so on.

There'd be no danger of a cliff edge, but there would be the reality of a frog being slowly boiled.

It would've been better if we'd left earlier, and I'm not delighted with any of the credible options (as I've said before, I hesitated rather more than I expected before voting).

We had vetoes and opt outs on an EU army and the single currency, so no we wouldn't be having those discussions.

I'm looking forward to a hard/WTO Brexit, it will help force us to live within our means and take away all those needless tax credits to the working classes, they've had it too good for too long.

Tax credits should be abolished, along with landlord benefit and a whole bunch of other stuff too.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Pulpstar, agree entirely.

Mr. Eagles, yes, because the EU never tries to centralise more power...

David_Evershed

DavidL said:

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

It's not Vince Cable's fault that the media give him little coverage. The media don't give many serious politicians much coverage - they are mostly only interested in personality clashes.

For a thoughtful and interesting recent speech by Vince Cable, which got zero media coverage, see

https://www.libdemvoice.org/vince-only-lib-dems-offer-strategy-for-growth-and-prosperity-55803.html

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Pulpstar, agree entirely.

Mr. Eagles, yes, because the EU never tries to centralise more power...

They try and we have vetoes and opt outs.

TheScreamingEagles

Ishmael_Z said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

If only someone had warned that Vote Leave's have cake and eat it approach was bollocks.

The problem in a word is: infantility. Johnson, Verhofstadt, Farage and Barnier are behaving in a way which 20 years ago would have been unthinkable in a senior politician, because they have Twitter at their fingertips and the example of the POTUS to show how it's acceptable to use it. And the medium is the message here, and Twitter will bring us the disaster of the century because it has come down to a test of that arse Johnson's claim that the EU can whistle. I'd be happier with Blair and mandelson fronting our operation because I'd expect them to behave like adults.

Feck that sounds pompous, but it's true.

You're right.

David Davis is furious at moves by Boris Johnson and Michael Gove to team up on Brexit and will resist their attempts to impose their views on the government, The Times has learnt.

The secretary of state for exiting the European Union is understood to be deeply unimpressed by suggestions that cabinet colleagues are holding discussions about “getting on with” Brexit. At the weekend it emerged that they had written a memo to Theresa May, saying that they were “profoundly worried” about “insufficient energy” in some parts of government and urging preparations for a “no-deal” exit.

There are concerns that the collaboration between Mr Johnson, the foreign secretary, and Mr Gove, the environment secretary, could hinder work on Brexit in the run-up to the European Council summit next month. EU negotiators may want to know whether the pair, who jointly ran the Vote Leave campaign before falling out over their leadership ambitions, agree.

“He [Mr Davis] was furious with Boris and Michael for their intervention,” an ally of the Brexit secretary said. “He wants to demonstrate he’s in charge and in control. He’s angry that other people are interfering.” Another MP confirmed that relations with Mr Johnson in particular were poor.

A senior ally of Mr Gove and Mr Johnson has expressed contempt for Mr Davis, calling him a “f***wit”.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-secretary-david-davis-angry-at-interference-by-michael-gove-and-boris-johnson-vn8xtd9dp

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/elashton/status/930453269268267008

MarqueeMark

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

Part of the reason for electing Strong and Cable was that his Twickenham constituency was within easy reach of all the major media studios in London !!

I honestly wonder if he has been unwell. He has never been exactly shy about getting himself on the media before.

He is 74 years old !

He is also disappointing his core constituency - arch remainers. When we do actually Brexit, his supporters will no doubt see it as worse treachery than er, the last major LibDem act of treachery.....

FF43

AlsoIndigo said:

IanB2 said:

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

It's always someone else's fault; the pied pipers that led so many down this blind alley are never to blame.

The voters will see it as the EU being obstructive, that's the political reality never mind whose fault it really is, expect to see more union jacks and a swing to hard brexit in the polls

I could see the EU being resented and there being a swing AWAY from Hard Brexit. Psychology. The resentment comes from feeling you don't have a choice. In this case we did have a choice (and still do to a certain extent), but people aren't going to admit to messing it up.

TheScreamingEagles

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/elashton/status/930453269268267008

Ken Clarke as PM

George Osborne as Chancellor

Lord Mandelson as Brexit Secretary

Works for me.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, and if QMV simply decides that the EU Army should be funded by EU funds and that Britain's contribution should rise significantly?

And you're relying on British PM's standing up for this country against the EU, which, sadly, hasn't happened much of late. Blair threw away half the rebate for nothing, Brown reneged upon the Lisbon referendum, Cameron tried renegotiating and got such a poor offer it harmed rather than helped the Remain campaign.

Richard_Nabavi

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

TheScreamingEagles

I keep on asking this but get no reply.

If Brexit is easy, can one of PB's Leavers propose a decent and realistic proposal for the Irish Border?

N.B. Invading Ireland or asking the Republic to leave the EU aren't options.

Morris_Dancer

According to Twitter, there are rebel tanks in Harare, the capital of Zimbabwe.

MarqueeMark

David_Evershed said:

DavidL said:

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

It's not Vince Cable's fault that the media give him little coverage. The media don't give many serious politicians much coverage - they are mostly only interested in personality clashes.

For a thoughtful and interesting recent speech by Vince Cable, which got zero media coverage, see

https://www.libdemvoice.org/vince-only-lib-dems-offer-strategy-for-growth-and-prosperity-55803.html

Ah, so he's doing the stand-up circuit? Explains his absence....

AlsoIndigo

Scott_P said:

AlsoIndigo said:

The UK exports approximately half a million cars a year to the EU. If government just put its hand in its pocket and compensated the industry at 1500 quid per car that would cost less than a billion pounds, yes I know WTO, but I am sure there are incentive schemes that would have the same value but not break the letter of those rules.

Tariffs are not the issue if the cars can't legally be sold because they are not recognised.

@faisalislam: @CommonsBEIS MP presses SMMT’s Hawes on German car manufacturers thing: “To put it in context - 56% of our exports go to Europe - 7% of theirs come here”

7% of Germany's car, how many of France's cars ? or Spain's cars ? or Czech Cars ? If our cars stop going to the EU it wont just be German cars that won't be coming here.

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, and if QMV simply decides that the EU Army should be funded by EU funds and that Britain's contribution should rise significantly?

And you're relying on British PM's standing up for this country against the EU, which, sadly, hasn't happened much of late. Blair threw away half the rebate for nothing, Brown reneged upon the Lisbon referendum, Cameron tried renegotiating and got such a poor offer it harmed rather than helped the Remain campaign.

More Project Bullshit from you.

But this “common defence” will only come about “when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides”. Unlike in other areas of EU decision-making, the European Commission can’t propose laws about security and defence, and any decisions in these areas must be made unanimously.

That means that the UK effectively has a veto.

UK law also states that no such common EU defence powers can be handed from the UK to the EU without the approval of parliament and a referendum on the decision. So the government would need the support of both the public and MPs before they could make such a decision.

Do I have to explain what unanimously means to you, and why QMV can't apply?

https://fullfact.org/europe/hunt-eu-army/

kjh

SouthamObserver said:

Rachel Reeves is very smart. No surprise the Corbynistas don't want her anywhere near the Labour front bench.

I needed to contact her when she was shadow DWP Secretary. Utterly, utterly, utterly useless. Over a 2 year period I was repeatedly asked to resend stuff. Each time I did, nothing whatsoever happened. Each time I was assured (absolute promise) that wouldn't happen again and each time it did. I was contacting her on a high profile pension issue as part of a campaign. I can say without fail every single MP was better than her and she was the Shadow Secretary for the DWP for gods sake and I can tell you many others was awful as well, but she topped the league by miles.

Pulpstar

Morris_Dancer said:

According to Twitter, there are rebel tanks in Harare, the capital of Zimbabwe.

I don't often wish men in heir 90s ill, but I'm hopeful Mugabe will get the Gadaffi treatment in his final moments.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, assuming that situation remains the same and there's no centralising change (which would be contrary to the driving principle of EU ideology and recent history), that doesn't actually address the point I made about funding.

The comment I made on recent PMs is, of course, factual.

rottenborough

https://reaction.life/simply-incredible-emma-dent-coad-ever-got-mp/

anothernick

TheScreamingEagles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

If only someone had warned that Vote Leave's have cake and eat it approach was bollocks.

The problem in a word is: infantility. Johnson, Verhofstadt, Farage and Barnier are behaving in a way which 20 years ago would have been unthinkable in a senior politician, because they have Twitter at their fingertips and the example of the POTUS to show how it's acceptable to use it. And the medium is the message here, and Twitter will bring us the disaster of the century because it has come down to a test of that arse Johnson's claim that the EU can whistle. I'd be happier with Blair and mandelson fronting our operation because I'd expect them to behave like adults.

Feck that sounds pompous, but it's true.

You're right.

David Davis is furious at moves by Boris Johnson and Michael Gove to team up on Brexit and will resist their attempts to impose their views on the government, The Times has learnt.

The secretary of state for exiting the European Union is understood to be deeply unimpressed by suggestions that cabinet colleagues are holding discussions about “getting on with” Brexit. At the weekend it emerged that they had written a memo to Theresa May, saying that they were “profoundly worried” about “insufficient energy” in some parts of government and urging preparations for a “no-deal” exit.

There are concerns that the collaboration between Mr Johnson, the foreign secretary, and Mr Gove, the environment secretary, could hinder work on Brexit in the run-up to the European Council summit next month. EU negotiators may want to know whether the pair, who jointly ran the Vote Leave campaign before falling out over their leadership ambitions, agree.

“He [Mr Davis] was furious with Boris and Michael for their intervention,” an ally of the Brexit secretary said. “He wants to demonstrate he’s in charge and in control. He’s angry that other people are interfering.” Another MP confirmed that relations with Mr Johnson in particular were poor.

A senior ally of Mr Gove and Mr Johnson has expressed contempt for Mr Davis, calling him a “f***wit”.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-secretary-david-davis-angry-at-interference-by-michael-gove-and-boris-johnson-vn8xtd9dp

Good to see that the leading Brexiters are fighting amongst themselves. A sure sign that the project is in trouble.

FF43

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Pulpstar, given he's been seen as a figurehead for some time, I wonder if tanks are there to ensure the generals' chosen replacement has a successful coronation.

AlsoIndigo

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, and if QMV simply decides that the EU Army should be funded by EU funds and that Britain's contribution should rise significantly?

And you're relying on British PM's standing up for this country against the EU, which, sadly, hasn't happened much of late. Blair threw away half the rebate for nothing, Brown reneged upon the Lisbon referendum, Cameron tried renegotiating and got such a poor offer it harmed rather than helped the Remain campaign.

More Project Bullshit from you.

But this “common defence” will only come about “when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides”. Unlike in other areas of EU decision-making, the European Commission can’t propose laws about security and defence, and any decisions in these areas must be made unanimously.

That means that the UK effectively has a veto.

UK law also states that no such common EU defence powers can be handed from the UK to the EU without the approval of parliament and a referendum on the decision. So the government would need the support of both the public and MPs before they could make such a decision.

Do I have to explain what unanimously means to you, and why QMV can't apply?

https://fullfact.org/europe/hunt-eu-army/

Up until today apparently

https://qz.com/1127984/eu-army-bloc-forging-ahead-with-its-military-integration-to-shake-off-us-dependence/

rottenborough

Pulpstar said:

Morris_Dancer said:

According to Twitter, there are rebel tanks in Harare, the capital of Zimbabwe.

I don't often wish men in heir 90s ill, but I'm hopeful Mugabe will get the Gadaffi treatment in his final moments.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-zimbabwe-politics-tanks/tanks-seen-heading-towards-zimbabwe-capital-witnesses-idUKKBN1DE1WB

TheScreamingEagles

AlsoIndigo said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, and if QMV simply decides that the EU Army should be funded by EU funds and that Britain's contribution should rise significantly?

And you're relying on British PM's standing up for this country against the EU, which, sadly, hasn't happened much of late. Blair threw away half the rebate for nothing, Brown reneged upon the Lisbon referendum, Cameron tried renegotiating and got such a poor offer it harmed rather than helped the Remain campaign.

More Project Bullshit from you.

But this “common defence” will only come about “when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides”. Unlike in other areas of EU decision-making, the European Commission can’t propose laws about security and defence, and any decisions in these areas must be made unanimously.

That means that the UK effectively has a veto.

UK law also states that no such common EU defence powers can be handed from the UK to the EU without the approval of parliament and a referendum on the decision. So the government would need the support of both the public and MPs before they could make such a decision.

Do I have to explain what unanimously means to you, and why QMV can't apply?

https://fullfact.org/europe/hunt-eu-army/

Up until today apparently

https://qz.com/1127984/eu-army-bloc-forging-ahead-with-its-military-integration-to-shake-off-us-dependence/

Have you read your link?

The UK had always resisted the idea of joint EU defense, fearing some kind of big “European army,” but the country’s planned exit from the bloc has removed that hurdle, allowing 23 other EU countries to move forward.

Sean_F

Pulpstar said:

Morris_Dancer said:

According to Twitter, there are rebel tanks in Harare, the capital of Zimbabwe.

I don't often wish men in heir 90s ill, but I'm hopeful Mugabe will get the Gadaffi treatment in his final moments.

One would certainly hope so.

Ishmael_Z

anothernick said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Ishmael_Z said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

If only someone had warned that Vote Leave's have cake and eat it approach was bollocks.

The problem in a word is: infantility. Johnson, Verhofstadt, Farage and Barnier are behaving in a way which 20 years ago would have been unthinkable in a senior politician, because they have Twitter at their fingertips and the example of the POTUS to show how it's acceptable to use it. And the medium is the message here, and Twitter will bring us the disaster of the century because it has come down to a test of that arse Johnson's claim that the EU can whistle. I'd be happier with Blair and mandelson fronting our operation because I'd expect them to behave like adults.

Feck that sounds pompous, but it's true.

You're right.

David Davis is furious at moves by Boris Johnson and Michael Gove to team up on Brexit and will resist their attempts to impose their views on the government, The Times has learnt.
Snip itten a memo to Theresa May, saying that they were “profoundly worried” about “insufficient energy” in some parts of government and urging preparations for a “no-deal” exit.

There are concerns that the collaboration between Mr Johnson, the foreign secretary, and Mr Gove, the environment secretary, could hinder work on Brexit in the run-up to the European Council summit next month. EU negotiators may want to know whether the pair, who jointly ran the Vote Leave campaign before falling out over their leadership ambitions, agree.

“He [Mr Davis] was furious with Boris and Michael for their intervention,” an ally of the Brexit secretary said. “He wants to demonstrate he’s in charge and in control. He’s angry that other people are interfering.” Another MP confirmed that relations with Mr Johnson in particular were poor.

A senior ally of Mr Gove and Mr Johnson has expressed contempt for Mr Davis, calling him a “f***wit”.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-secretary-david-davis-angry-at-interference-by-michael-gove-and-boris-johnson-vn8xtd9dp

Good to see that the leading Brexiters are fighting amongst themselves. A sure sign that the project is in trouble.

So, face, take that! I bet you feel pretty silly now with no nose.

rottenborough

so not rebel tanks, Reuters are saying, but the official military who may have had enough.

AlsoIndigo

FF43 said:

The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

And yet have failed to provide an itemised list of exactly which items we should be paying for and how much they cost, and on what terms they should be paid. Instead they wave their hands in their air and pull a random large number out of their nether regions, and then wonder why its perceived as attempts to browbeat and blackmail rather than a reasoned attempt to recover monies owed.

AlsoIndigo

TheScreamingEagles said:

AlsoIndigo said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, and if QMV simply decides that the EU Army should be funded by EU funds and that Britain's contribution should rise significantly?

And you're relying on British PM's standing up for this country against the EU, which, sadly, hasn't happened much of late. Blair threw away half the rebate for nothing, Brown reneged upon the Lisbon referendum, Cameron tried renegotiating and got such a poor offer it harmed rather than helped the Remain campaign.

More Project Bullshit from you.

But this “common defence” will only come about “when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides”. Unlike in other areas of EU decision-making, the European Commission can’t propose laws about security and defence, and any decisions in these areas must be made unanimously.

That means that the UK effectively has a veto.

UK law also states that no such common EU defence powers can be handed from the UK to the EU without the approval of parliament and a referendum on the decision. So the government would need the support of both the public and MPs before they could make such a decision.

Do I have to explain what unanimously means to you, and why QMV can't apply?

https://fullfact.org/europe/hunt-eu-army/

Up until today apparently

https://qz.com/1127984/eu-army-bloc-forging-ahead-with-its-military-integration-to-shake-off-us-dependence/

Have you read your link?

The UK had always resisted the idea of joint EU defense, fearing some kind of big “European army,” but the country’s planned exit from the bloc has removed that hurdle, allowing 23 other EU countries to move forward.

Yes I did. Having signed that today and now they are moving ahead with their new toy do you think they are going to be in a hurry to let us revoke BrExit and veto the idea ?

rottenborough

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/elashton/status/930453269268267008

Ken Clarke as PM

George Osborne as Chancellor

Lord Mandelson as Brexit Secretary

Works for me.

Not much Brexit in that list though :-)

DavidL

David_Evershed said:

DavidL said:

El_Capitano said:

Curious that Vince Cable's score has gone down so sharply, from -15 to -24. I'm not aware of him doing anything of any significance in September or October.

It could of course be that his failure to do absolutely anything is a part of the problem. He makes the invisible man look really high profile.

It's not Vince Cable's fault that the media give him little coverage. The media don't give many serious politicians much coverage - they are mostly only interested in personality clashes.

For a thoughtful and interesting recent speech by Vince Cable, which got zero media coverage, see

https://www.libdemvoice.org/vince-only-lib-dems-offer-strategy-for-growth-and-prosperity-55803.html

Interesting thanks although it did rather remind me of LBJ's comment: "Making a speech on economics is a lot like pissing down your leg. It seems hot to you, but it never does to anyone else."

TheScreamingEagles

AlsoIndigo said:

Yes I did. Having signed that today and now they are moving ahead with their new toy do you think they are going to be in a hurry to let us revoke BrExit and veto the idea ?

I'm sure they will, you and your fellow Leavers frottage yourselves over the notion that they are desperate for our money.

Scott_P

Government solves the problem of conflicting bill amendments, Brexit stylee...

@TomRailton1: @SamCoatesTimes getting themselves out of a bind by legally separating different meanings of 'exit day'

TheScreamingEagles

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/elashton/status/930453269268267008

Ken Clarke as PM

George Osborne as Chancellor

Lord Mandelson as Brexit Secretary

Works for me.

Not much Brexit in that list though :-)

That's a feature not a bug.

Look how well the Brexit three stooges in cabinet have done so far with Brexit

murali_s

MarkHopkins said:

SouthamObserver said:

Very sobering stuff on Brexit from UK car people in the Commons this afternoon. Put simply, No Deal kills the industry off over here to a very large extent.

The EU is using every dirty trick in the book to cause immense harm to us. Their threats are closer to a declaration of war than they are a negotiation.

LOL! What a ridiculous statement!

Jeez - some of the nutters on here really are totally unhinged.

anothernick

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. This attitude on their part was predictable, and predicted, but the anglo-centric worldview of many leavers makes it impossible for them to understand why other countries don't care much about the UK's future and see no reason to shield it from the consequences of its own stupidity.

Sean_F

anothernick said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. .

That seems to imply that we were part of a protection racket.

Charles

TheScreamingEagles said:

I keep on asking this but get no reply.

If Brexit is easy, can one of PB's Leavers propose a decent and realistic proposal for the Irish Border?

N.B. Invading Ireland or asking the Republic to leave the EU aren't options.

Pre approvals and electronic monitoring. The small time booze cruise stuff doesn't matter

DavidL

anothernick said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. This attitude on their part was predictable, and predicted, but the anglo-centric worldview of many leavers makes it impossible for them to understand why other countries don't care much about the UK's future and see no reason to shield it from the consequences of its own stupidity.

And you wanted to stay with these people?

Sean_F

DavidL said:

anothernick said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. This attitude on their part was predictable, and predicted, but the anglo-centric worldview of many leavers makes it impossible for them to understand why other countries don't care much about the UK's future and see no reason to shield it from the consequences of its own stupidity.

And you wanted to stay with these people?

He seems to think worse of them than you and I do.

Stark_Dawning

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/elashton/status/930453269268267008

Those on the Right who regard Field as a kind of pet won't be happy with that - he's basically accusing them and their kind of being blithering idiots. But then Field should have foreseen the political quagmire. The implementation of Brexit is as crucial as the conception, and Field avoids no culpability if he pleads only to have set the process in motion.

Richard_Nabavi

Charles said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I keep on asking this but get no reply.

If Brexit is easy, can one of PB's Leavers propose a decent and realistic proposal for the Irish Border?

N.B. Invading Ireland or asking the Republic to leave the EU aren't options.

Pre approvals and electronic monitoring. The small time booze cruise stuff doesn't matter

They already have the small-time booze-cruise (and fags) stuff across the Irish border. Quite big-time, in fact. Brexit doesn't make that problem any harder than it already is.

FF43

anothernick said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. This attitude on their part was predictable, and predicted, but the anglo-centric worldview of many leavers makes it impossible for them to understand why other countries don't care much about the UK's future and see no reason to shield it from the consequences of its own stupidity.

I would say the EU have two objectives that are somewhat in tension. They want to extract the UK from the EU with the least further damage to them possible. They want to shore up the value of membership. We left because we thought membership wasn't valuable. Necessarily therefore non-membership has to be a noticeable downgrade. They resolve that tension (they hope) by being on the Win side of all the Win/Lose equations while giving the UK enough Win/Win options that it will co-operate.

We have never articulated our real negotiation aims. In practice what we want is continuity. That nothing important changes as a consequence of leaving the EU. That aim is compatible with the first of the EU's aims and incompatible with the second.

anothernick

DavidL said:

anothernick said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. This attitude on their part was predictable, and predicted, but the anglo-centric worldview of many leavers makes it impossible for them to understand why other countries don't care much about the UK's future and see no reason to shield it from the consequences of its own stupidity.

And you wanted to stay with these people?

Certainly. They should be our friends and allies. And they are our biggest customers. I can't think of any other country in the world that thinks its future lies in cutting itself off from its nearest neighbours.

FrancisUrquhart

What a lovely lady...

https://order-order.com/2017/11/14/dent-coad-drew-tory-lynched-tree/

TheScreamingEagles

FrancisUrquhart said:

What a lovely lady...

https://order-order.com/2017/11/14/dent-coad-drew-tory-lynched-tree/

Thank god that lynching was nothing to do Shaun Bailey

Charles

anothernick said:

DavidL said:

anothernick said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. This attitude on their part was predictable, and predicted, but the anglo-centric worldview of many leavers makes it impossible for them to understand why other countries don't care much about the UK's future and see no reason to shield it from the consequences of its own stupidity.

And you wanted to stay with these people?

Certainly. They should be our friends and allies. And they are our biggest customers. I can't think of any other country in the world that thinks its future lies in cutting itself off from its nearest neighbours.

Friends, allies and customers yes. Doesn't need political subsumation

But threatening to stop planes flying or cars ceasing to be approved from 1 day to the next isn't the behaviour of friends and allies

RobD

anothernick said:

DavidL said:

anothernick said:

FF43 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

FF43 said:

I can see the theory but I don't see the practice. If things are amicable enough to fix things like VTAs they will be amicable enough for a trade deal that is in both parties' interest. Now I accept that is a big negotiating space so we can't be sure what the trade deal will actually be, but it will be a meaningful trade deal.

You might be right, but there's a lot more incentive to the EU to avoid the massive disruption of no deal at all than there is to avoid the WTO-only scenario.

What's frustrating is that there doesn't seem to be any grown-up debate about all this. The UK parliament seems intent on dancing on pin-heads, passing amendments which are completely meaningless without the cooperation of the EU27, and the EU27 seem to be focused on extracting Danegeld and ignoring the future relationship.

I see what you are saying, but I suspect it won't play that way. ie the EU will fold before we do on Article 50 differences and will concede on minimal agreement rather than holding fast to the view that they have offered us a reasonable deal and if we don't want to take it, they are not going to bend over backwards to accommodate us. Danegeld is our (your) description. The EU genuinely thinks that money is owed to them.

But you are right that the EU isn't very interested in the future relationship. Maybe they should be.

They are more concerned that the UK should be seen to suffer by leaving in order to ensure no other country goes down the same road. This attitude on their part was predictable, and predicted, but the anglo-centric worldview of many leavers makes it impossible for them to understand why other countries don't care much about the UK's future and see no reason to shield it from the consequences of its own stupidity.

And you wanted to stay with these people?

Certainly. They should be our friends and allies. And they are our biggest customers. I can't think of any other country in the world that thinks its future lies in cutting itself off from its nearest neighbours.

I don’t think you need to be members of a political union to be friends/allies.

logical_song

rottenborough said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/elashton/status/930453269268267008

Ken Clarke as PM

George Osborne as Chancellor

Lord Mandelson as Brexit Secretary

Works for me.

Not much Brexit in that list though :-)

Their terms of reference should include an instruction to take into account the result of the referendum.

TheScreamingEagles

Awesome.

Frank Field is arguing in the House of Commons that we should leave the European Union on our time -ie midnight GMT not CET, one hour before

Charles

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

What a lovely lady...

https://order-order.com/2017/11/14/dent-coad-drew-tory-lynched-tree/

Thank god that lynching was nothing to do Shaun Bailey

Although the hanged figure is black...