Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
Also whether the candidates are in jail and unable to campaign.
I've just had in an agreement which has the following clause:
" Neither party will engage in behaviour which can be construed as verbal or sexual abuse or harassment such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, groping, indecent exposure, dirty talk/jokes or requests for sex. "
The world has gone mad !!
Harassment implies its repeated.
It seems to me the problem is (a) some misread the signs and/or don't know how to make a pass, so misjudge it, and, (b) if rejected, either don't get it, or think it's a sign of playing hard to get, so still keep on trying.
One should be forgiven the former, with some gentle feedback, but not excused the latter. And in each case it will be a question of degree and context.
The solution is not the puritan one that men or women should cease any sexual interest in each other forevermore in the workplace, nor is that feasible.
I've just had in an agreement which has the following clause:
" Neither party will engage in behaviour which can be construed as verbal or sexual abuse or harassment such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, groping, indecent exposure, dirty talk/jokes or requests for sex. "
The world has gone mad !!
While I know there is a time and place for them, and repeated using of them can definitely be unwelcome and should not be done if so, I do think it odd that 'dirty jokes' has equivalence with indecent exposure and groping!
(1) I am happy to pay what we owe, or are morally obliged to honour, on the EU budget and its contingent pensions/liabilities (2) I think it's also fair to take into account the UK's share of EU assets into that calculation (3) I am happy to pay an ongoing annual payment, or lump sum upfront, as part of negotiations about our future trading and security relationship, and to participate in selected EU programmes (4) I recognise that choosing programmes à la carte means you sometimes pay more for those choices, and am happy to negotiate on that basis (5) I recognise that we will need to be generous and good-natured as future close neighbours, who will often still work together in close cooperation, and such negotiations should take place in that spirit
What I'm far less happy about is paying a very large amount of money upfront, which has little justification behind it, just to initiate trade talks pour encourager les autres.
It's that sort of legal and fiscal "flexibility" that gave rise to the perception EU is unfair and unjust in its governance in the first place.
(1) I am happy to pay what we owe, or are morally obliged to honour, on the EU budget and its contingent pensions/liabilities (2) I think it's also fair to take into account the UK's share of EU assets into that calculation (3) I am happy to pay an ongoing annual payment, or lump sum upfront, as part of negotiations about our future trading and security relationship, and to participate in selected EU programmes (4) I recognise that choosing programmes à la carte means you sometimes pay more for those choices, and am happy to negotiate on that basis (5) I recognise that we will need to be generous and good-natured as future close neighbours, who will often still work together in close cooperation, and such negotiations should take place in that spirit
What I'm far less happy about is paying a very large amount of money upfront, which has little justification behind it, just to initiate trade talks pour encourager les autres.
It's that sort of legal and fiscal "flexibility" that gave rise to the perception EU is unfair and unjust in its governance in the first place.
Isn't that just the EU position?
They aren't asking for money up front.
They are asking for more detail on how we propose to settle EU accounts. + detail on Ireland which i think is trickier.
Whereas the UK are saying - we will honour our obligations by ensuring no EU country is worse off but we haven't committed to sorting out the pensions thing, and other longer term liabilities.
(1) I am happy to pay what we owe, or are morally obliged to honour, on the EU budget and its contingent pensions/liabilities (2) I think it's also fair to take into account the UK's share of EU assets into that calculation (3) I am happy to pay an ongoing annual payment, or lump sum upfront, as part of negotiations about our future trading and security relationship, and to participate in selected EU programmes (4) I recognise that choosing programmes à la carte means you sometimes pay more for those choices, and am happy to negotiate on that basis (5) I recognise that we will need to be generous and good-natured as future close neighbours, who will often still work together in close cooperation, and such negotiations should take place in that spirit
What I'm far less happy about is paying a very large amount of money upfront, which has little justification behind it, just to initiate trade talks pour encourager les autres.
Sounds fair to me. The commitment up front to a specific amount was a choice. One which we shall probably have to accede to, but it seems to get conflated with our actual obligations.
This is not a UK problem. It is a Conservative party problem. The only reason the government is holding out is because paying up would tear the Tories to pieces. It is classic party before country.
No, it's because the EU is demanding payment with no guarantee of outcome on the trade talks.
If the payments were contingent on a trade deal it would be easy.
At this stage, it is not demanding any payment at all. It is demanding progress on payments.
And the UK has indicated a willingness to pay £50bn on a contingent basis (a part of which - all our liabilities - is unilateral). The EU is saying the full amount is a liability and are only offering talks on trade in return
As far as I can tell, the UK has indicated a willingness to pay some money, but it has not yet agreed a sum. It is still arguing with itself over that.
It is negotiating with the EU over that. I very rarely read any criticism from you of the EU's position over this, or anything else.
Let's say the EU demanded £100bn instead, would you pay that as well, no questions asked?
The EU did not ask for that, though. It could have done, given the strength of our respective hands in the negotiation, but it didn't. Would I have paid it if that had been the required sum? I might have agreed to in principle to get us to the second stage. My belief is that once we are talking trade, a lot of the issues we currently face go away because everyone will be invested in securing a positive outcome. That also puts the payments back on the table.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
I've just had in an agreement which has the following clause:
" Neither party will engage in behaviour which can be construed as verbal or sexual abuse or harassment such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, groping, indecent exposure, dirty talk/jokes or requests for sex. "
The world has gone mad !!
While I know there is a time and place for them, and repeated using of them can definitely be unwelcome and should not be done if so, I do think it odd that 'dirty jokes' has equivalence with indecent exposure and groping!
You haven't heard my one about the Spaniard and a sheep.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
Presumably not, although lack of a separatist majority would surely very much undermine the position of the separatists moving forward.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
Presumably not, although lack of a separatist majority would surely very much undermine the position of the separatists moving forward.
Only if you class Podemos as a non separatist party which I am not sure they are.
I've just had in an agreement which has the following clause:
" Neither party will engage in behaviour which can be construed as verbal or sexual abuse or harassment such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, groping, indecent exposure, dirty talk/jokes or requests for sex. "
The world has gone mad !!
While I know there is a time and place for them, and repeated using of them can definitely be unwelcome and should not be done if so, I do think it odd that 'dirty jokes' has equivalence with indecent exposure and groping!
You haven't heard my one about the Spaniard and a sheep.
And now I am afraid to hear it!
Words can be powerful though - there was a fantasy webcomic I once read, famous for its anticlimactic jokes, and in one such instance the 'heroes' defeated a villain by telling a joke so bad it killed him. Good times
A good article, Mr. Nabavi, with which I largely agree.
There's a great difference, though (besides scale of the pound of flesh demanded), which is that this follows a democratic vote in a free country, and isn't the price demanded following failure in war.
ITV purpose.
The EUphiles hate us and want to destroy us and they're going to make sure that they use the EU to achieve that goal.
.
The the club.
UK, US, Canada, Aus, NZ for starters...then Japan, China, Thailand, Vietnam....add in Brazil, Mexico, South Africa.
We could call it the Enterprise Economy Commonwealth. The EEC.
What's that France, you want to join? Non...
Nostalgic twaddle.
Indeed!
Not least the problem exists that nearly all our export earning businesses voted Remain.
Though tarriff reduction on Australian iron ore will no doubt be a great boon to the Leave voting steel workers of South Wales.
Steel? Pah! We are looking at making graphene the core of the Welsh economy....
We handed leadership in grapheme technology to the Chinese and others almost as soon as it was discovered at Manchester University.
EU rules made it near impossible to encourage us to develop new national industries. That will now be gone as a bar.
Still time to win back the race on graphene. But it will require a Govt. that is prepared to throw some money at it. A bit of foresight. Investment.
Risk.
Absolute rubbish. We threw away our grapheme opportunity for reasons that were totally unconnected to the EU and all to do with the perennial UK disease of short-termism trumping investment in R&D.
Graphene discovered by Professors Novoselev and Geim.
Professor Novoselov, 36, known as Kostya, first worked with Professor Geim, 51, as a PhD-student in the Netherlands. He subsequently followed Geim to the United Kingdom. Both of them originally studied and began their careers as physicists in Russia.
So "our graphene opportunity" was Russia's graphene opportunity if we are being nationalist.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
I've just had in an agreement which has the following clause:
" Neither party will engage in behaviour which can be construed as verbal or sexual abuse or harassment such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, groping, indecent exposure, dirty talk/jokes or requests for sex. "
The world has gone mad !!
While I know there is a time and place for them, and repeated using of them can definitely be unwelcome and should not be done if so, I do think it odd that 'dirty jokes' has equivalence with indecent exposure and groping!
You haven't heard my one about the Spaniard and a sheep.
And now I am afraid to hear it!
Words can be powerful though - there was a fantasy webcomic I once read, famous for its anticlimactic jokes, and in one such instance the 'heroes' defeated a villain by telling a joke so bad it killed him. Good times
Monthy Python had English soldiers relating a joke in German to kill German soldiers. The English soldiers did not understand and were spared.
I've just had in an agreement which has the following clause:
" Neither party will engage in behaviour which can be construed as verbal or sexual abuse or harassment such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, groping, indecent exposure, dirty talk/jokes or requests for sex. "
The world has gone mad !!
While I know there is a time and place for them, and repeated using of them can definitely be unwelcome and should not be done if so, I do think it odd that 'dirty jokes' has equivalence with indecent exposure and groping!
You haven't heard my one about the Spaniard and a sheep.
And now I am afraid to hear it!
Words can be powerful though - there was a fantasy webcomic I once read, famous for its anticlimactic jokes, and in one such instance the 'heroes' defeated a villain by telling a joke so bad it killed him. Good times
That sounds like my Spaniard and a sheep joke too.
A good article, Mr. Nabavi, with which I largely agree.
There's a great difference, though (besides scale of the pound of flesh demanded), which is that this follows a democratic vote in a free country, and isn't the price demanded following failure in war.
ITV purpose.
The EUphiles hate us and want to destroy us and they're going to make sure that they use the EU to achieve that goal.
.
The the club.
UK, US, Canada, Aus, NZ for starters...then Japan, China, Thailand, Vietnam....add in Brazil, Mexico, South Africa.
We could call it the Enterprise Economy Commonwealth. The EEC.
What's that France, you want to join? Non...
Nostalgic twaddle.
Indeed!
Not least the problem exists that nearly all our export earning businesses voted Remain.
Though tarriff reduction on Australian iron ore will no doubt be a great boon to the Leave voting steel workers of South Wales.
Steel? Pah! We are looking at making graphene the core of the Welsh economy....
We handed leadership in grapheme technology to the Chinese and others almost as soon as it was discovered at Manchester University.
EU rules made it near impossible to encourage us to develop new national industries. That will now be gone as a bar.
Still time to win back the race on graphene. But it will require a Govt. that is prepared to throw some money at it. A bit of foresight. Investment.
Risk.
Absolute rubbish. We threw away our grapheme opportunity for reasons that were totally unconnected to the EU and all to do with the perennial UK disease of short-termism trumping investment in R&D.
Graphene discovered by Professors Novoselev and Geim.
Professor Novoselov, 36, known as Kostya, first worked with Professor Geim, 51, as a PhD-student in the Netherlands. He subsequently followed Geim to the United Kingdom. Both of them originally studied and began their careers as physicists in Russia.
So "our graphene opportunity" was Russia's graphene opportunity if we are being nationalist.
Not really. The original patents were filed in the UK and owned by the University of Manchester.
I've just had in an agreement which has the following clause:
" Neither party will engage in behaviour which can be construed as verbal or sexual abuse or harassment such as inappropriate touching, grabbing, groping, indecent exposure, dirty talk/jokes or requests for sex. "
The world has gone mad !!
While I know there is a time and place for them, and repeated using of them can definitely be unwelcome and should not be done if so, I do think it odd that 'dirty jokes' has equivalence with indecent exposure and groping!
You haven't heard my one about the Spaniard and a sheep.
And now I am afraid to hear it!
Words can be powerful though - there was a fantasy webcomic I once read, famous for its anticlimactic jokes, and in one such instance the 'heroes' defeated a villain by telling a joke so bad it killed him. Good times
Monthy Python had English soldiers relating a joke in German to kill German soldiers. The English soldiers did not understand and were spared.
Although in that case I believe the joke was supposed to be a good one.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking point, but all the polls show a significant drop in PP support nationally. At the very least that would end the party's Senate veto over constitutional reform. And the next Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Richard Nabavi's comments above can basically be summarised as follows:
1. The UK will leave a club but will pay an additional two years subscription [ even though it will be a transition period in which the UK will be a member for all practical purposes ]
2. Thereafter, the UK should be allowed to enjoy those privileges and facilities of the club that it wants to enjoy and will not have to follow those rules it does not want to.
And, for that the UK will not pay anything at all.
Why should anyone be a club member ?
If the UK is not allowed these then the Europeans are reminded of some future "revenge" conflict.
Morning all. Thanks for the comments, even if some of them fall short of full-throated acclamation!
Picking up a couple of points:
- I don't see how anyone can regard the EU demands as 'trifling'. As I understand it, they are demanding some unspecific but large figure, in the region of €60bn to €100bn, in addition to any payments during the transitional period and in addition to any on-going payments we might make for participating in specific EU programmes. That's a lot of dosh by any standard - even if spread over, say, 5 years, it's still a chunky dent in the national budget. It would require savings from the national budget comparable to those which the opposition parties lambasted in the past as 'wholly unrealistic':
- In any case, you can't have it both ways. If the sum is trifling, and simply relates to existing liabilities, why are the EU27 making such a fuss about it and trying to use it as a lever in the talks before even beginning to talk about the on-going relationship? It is, after all, even more 'trifling' for them than it is for us, as a proportion of GDP. If it were just a technical issue, it could be delegated to a technical committee to quantify the liability. The truth is that the EU position is completely unsupported by the treaties, and indeed directly contradicts Article 50. The figures quoted are completely out of proportion to our annual budget contributions as full members. The demand might not be intended as blackmail, but it certainly looks like it..
- There are three possible outcomes from this. Either we give in to the blackmail, which will seriously damage the UK public finances, leave an enormous amount of bad feeling and provide an opening for anti-EU politicians to exploit, or Theresa May won't be able to get agreement from parliament, which would scupper the talks, or the EU backs down and becomes more reasonable, which would be overwhelmingly in the interests of both sides. I hope it will be the third of these, but I'm not confident that it will.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking point, but all the polls show a significant drop in PP support nationally. At the very least that would end the party's Senate veto over constitutional reform. And the next Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking point, but all the polls show a significant drop in PP support nationally. At the very least that would end the party's Senate veto over constitutional reform. And the next Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yep, Podemos supports a constitutional solution. It will not support UDI. Thus, if current polling is correct those parties that do support it will fall well below 50% of the vote. PP's support has dropped to the extent that if the polling is accurate it can no longer secure a Senate majority. Without that, it cannot block constitutional reform.
Richard Nabavi's comments above can basically be summarised as follows:
1. The UK will leave a club but will pay an additional two years subscription [ even though it will be a transition period in which the UK will be a member for all practical purposes ]
2. Thereafter, the UK should be allowed to enjoy those privileges and facilities of the club that it wants to enjoy and will not have to follow those rules it does not want to.
And, for that the UK will not pay anything at all.
Why should anyone be a club member ?
If the UK is not allowed these then the Europeans are reminded of some future "revenge" conflict.
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
re @Richard_Nabavi "That's a lot of dosh by any standard - even if spread over, say, 5 years.."
"Billion" has become an easy word to chuck around without thinking too much. There are about 25 million households in the country, so £50 bn is £4,000 per household. It is 28% of total income tax receipts (£177.4 bn) in 2016-7. It really is a very big number
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
Deadlock is a win for Madrid as it stops separatism in its tracks. Rajoy's gamble would have worked. I still have a problem, though, with polling and language. I think that polls in Catalan could overstate the separatist vote, while those in Spanish may do the opposite. This will all be decided on turnout. We know that separatist voters will flock to the polls. Will unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yep, Podemos supports a constitutional solution. It will not support UDI. Thus, if current polling is correct those parties that do support it will fall well below 50% of the vote. PP's support has dropped to the extent that if the polling is accurate it can no longer secure a Senate majority. Without that, it cannot block constitutional reform.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
Corbyn's official policy is ultimately to leave both the EU and single market though get a relationship as close as possible to those and to end free movement. The official shadow cabinet policy is just to back a slightly longer transition period than the Tories, not to permanently stay in the single market and customs union as the likes of Chuka Umunna want.
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain was lulled into complacency by the thought that as it was all very tricky , it shouldn't bother trying to find a solution. Waffle a bit and move on. That's not happening and may be for a positive reason. Having experienced something much better I suspect people are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
Richard Nabavi's comments above can basically be summarised as follows:
1. The UK will leave a club but will pay an additional two years subscription [ even though it will be a transition period in which the UK will be a member for all practical purposes ]
2. Thereafter, the UK should be allowed to enjoy those privileges and facilities of the club that it wants to enjoy and will not have to follow those rules it does not want to.
And, for that the UK will not pay anything at all.
Why should anyone be a club member ?
If the UK is not allowed these then the Europeans are reminded of some future "revenge" conflict.
The 'exit bill' is, apparently, payable even if we go to WTO terms. So your point 2 is nonsense.
Even if we sign a trade deal, like Canada, it would not be normal to pay vast sums for the privilege. A trade deal is a two-way thing: they offer us favourable access to their market, and we offer them favourable access to our market.
If they don't want to sign a trade deal with us, that would be a pity but it's entirely up to them. In that case, they should say so, and they should engage in friendly and constructive talks to ensure that we can move to WTO terms in an orderly fashion, without disruption.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible ne of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain was lulled into complacency by the thought that as it was all very tricky , it shouldn't bother trying to find a solution. Waffle a bit and move on. That's not happening and may be for a positive reason. Having experienced something much better I suspect people are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
The UK is the EU's largest export destination, of course their trading relationship with the UK matters. A FTA with the EU and any transition will settle the Irish border question. The DUP of course still won most seats in 2 NI elections this year despite Brexit.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Yet Podemos will still hold the balance of power in Catalonia on current polling.
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
Corbyn's official policy is ultimately to leave both the EU and single market though get a relationship as close as possible to those and to end free movement. The official shadow cabinet policy is just to back a slightly longer transition period than the Tories, not to permanently stay in the single market and customs union as the likes of Chuka Umunna want.
Why do you like Goebbels, keep repeating the same stuff ? Repeating many times does not make it true. Did Corbyn tell you this himself ?
"This will mean that under a Labour government the UK would continue to abide by the EU’s free movement rules, accept the jurisdiction of the European court of justice on trade and economic issues, and pay into the EU budget for a period of years after Brexit, in the hope of lessening the shock of leaving to the UK economy. In a further move that will delight many pro-EU Labour backers, Jeremy Corbyn’s party will also leave open the option of the UK remaining a member of the customs union and single market for good, beyond the end of the transitional period."
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
The UK is the EU's largest export destination, of course their trading relationship with the UK matters.
Yes, this idea they don't care about us crops up occasionally but makes no sense, even if we do indeed have more to lose than them; it would be ridiculously foolish of them to be indifferent to the outcome, and personally I think better of them than that. It also goes against others who insist the EU want us to stay and would find a way to allow that to happen if we came to our senses.
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain was lulled into complacency by the thought that as it was all very tricky , it shouldn't bother trying to find a solution. Waffle a bit and move on. That's not happening and may be for a positive reason. Having experienced something much better I suspect people are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Yet Podemos will still hold the balance of power in Catalonia on current polling.
I know. The point is that this does not lead to anything. There will be no majority for UDI. That is a win for Madrid.
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
So remain but no one is honest enough in labour to say it.
Lets hear that loud and clear from Corbyn and the shadow cabinet
re @Richard_Nabavi "That's a lot of dosh by any standard - even if spread over, say, 5 years.."
"Billion" has become an easy word to chuck around without thinking too much. There are about 25 million households in the country, so £50 bn is £4,000 per household. It is 28% of total income tax receipts (£177.4 bn) in 2016-7. It really is a very big number
"A billion here a billion there, pretty soon you are talking real money"
Attributed to Everett Dirksen at US Senate Committee.
Richard Nabavi's comments above can basically be summarised as follows:
1. The UK will leave a club but will pay an additional two years subscription [ even though it will be a transition period in which the UK will be a member for all practical purposes ]
2. Thereafter, the UK should be allowed to enjoy those privileges and facilities of the club that it wants to enjoy and will not have to follow those rules it does not want to.
And, for that the UK will not pay anything at all.
Why should anyone be a club member ?
If the UK is not allowed these then the Europeans are reminded of some future "revenge" conflict.
The 'exit bill' is, apparently, payable even if we go to WTO terms. So your point 2 is nonsense.
Even if we sign a trade deal, like Canada, it would not be normal to pay vast sums for the privilege. A trade deal is a two-way thing: they offer us favourable access to their market, and we offer them favourable access to our market.
If they don't want to sign a trade deal with us, that would be a pity but it's entirely up to them. In that case, they should say so, and they should engage in friendly and constructive talks to ensure that we can move to WTO terms in an orderly fashion, without disruption.
Canada does not have access to Services. Regarding #2. I simply wrote what is the UK's wish. UK's wish is not to go to WTO rules by effectively have a FTA as if nothing has happened.
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
So remain but no one is honest enough in labour to say it.
Lets hear that loud and clear from Corbyn and the shadow cabinet
It is not remain. Corbyn is committed to taking the UK out of the EU and then out of the single market and ending free movement, he just supports a longer transition period than the Tories.
A jobs first Brexit seems saner than a hard Brexit, a red white and blue Brexit, a cheese and onion Brexit or whatever flavour of Brexit one half of the cabinet is pursuing this week.
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
So remain but no one is honest enough in labour to say it.
Lets hear that loud and clear from Corbyn and the shadow cabinet
It is not remain. Corbyn is committed to taking the UK out of the EU and then out of the single market and ending free movement, he just supports a longer transition period than the Tories.
Not according to Surbiton but he is a hard remainer
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain was lulled into complacency by the thought that as it was all very tricky , it shouldn't bother trying to find a solution. Waffle a bit and move on. That's not happening and may be for a positive reason. Having experienced something much better I suspect people are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
It was me who posed the question. I don't get how they could be indifferent to us being screwed when they are the ones choosing to screw us.
That misunderstands the position of the EU and other member states. They think we chose to screw ourselves. They have no interest in stopping us, mitigating the consequences, and above all, in sharing the problem.
Richard Nabavi's comments above can basically be summarised as follows:
1. The UK will leave a club but will pay an additional two years subscription [ even though it will be a transition period in which the UK will be a member for all practical purposes ]
2. Thereafter, the UK should be allowed to enjoy those privileges and facilities of the club that it wants to enjoy and will not have to follow those rules it does not want to.
And, for that the UK will not pay anything at all.
Why should anyone be a club member ?
If the UK is not allowed these then the Europeans are reminded of some future "revenge" conflict.
The 'exit bill' is, apparently, payable even if we go to WTO terms. So your point 2 is nonsense.
Even if we sign a trade deal, like Canada, it would not be normal to pay vast sums for the privilege. A trade deal is a two-way thing: they offer us favourable access to their market, and we offer them favourable access to our market.
If they don't want to sign a trade deal with us, that would be a pity but it's entirely up to them. In that case, they should say so, and they should engage in friendly and constructive talks to ensure that we can move to WTO terms in an orderly fashion, without disruption.
Canada does not have access to Services. Regarding #2. I simply wrote what is the UK's wish. UK's wish is not to go to WTO rules by effectively have a FTA as if nothing has happened.
The problem is we're not even at the FTA stage. In theory, what's being discussed is what Britain ought to pay on leaving the EU.
No doubt if we agree to the EU's exit bill demands, they'll be demanding a lot more for an FTA. And having paid a lot to get around the negotiating table, can anyone see our government walking away and deciding not to chuck good money after bad?
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
Corbyn's official policy is ultimately to leave both the EU and single market though get a relationship as close as possible to those and to end free movement. The official shadow cabinet policy is just to back a slightly longer transition period than the Tories, not to permanently stay in the single market and customs union as the likes of Chuka Umunna want.
Why do you like Goebbels, keep repeating the same stuff ? Repeating many times does not make it true. Did Corbyn tell you this himself ?
"This will mean that under a Labour government the UK would continue to abide by the EU’s free movement rules, accept the jurisdiction of the European court of justice on trade and economic issues, and pay into the EU budget for a period of years after Brexit, in the hope of lessening the shock of leaving to the UK economy. In a further move that will delight many pro-EU Labour backers, Jeremy Corbyn’s party will also leave open the option of the UK remaining a member of the customs union and single market for good, beyond the end of the transitional period."
You have quoted details of Labour's commitment to a transition period, a transition period even the Tories are committed to for 2 years NOT permanent single market and customs union membership.
You do have to wonder how long labour can get away with non answers.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
So remain but no one is honest enough in labour to say it.
Lets hear that loud and clear from Corbyn and the shadow cabinet
It is not remain. Corbyn is committed to taking the UK out of the EU and then out of the single market and ending free movement, he just supports a longer transition period than the Tories.
Not according to Surbiton but he is a hard remainer
Of course he is, only the LDs, the SNP and Greens are committed to permanent single market and customs union membership not Corbyn's Labour Party.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Yet Podemos will still hold the balance of power in Catalonia on current polling.
I know. The point is that this does not lead to anything. There will be no majority for UDI. That is a win for Madrid.
Not if there is still a majority for an independence referendum, that does not remove the issue from the table.
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain ple are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
It was me who posed the question. I don't get how they could be indifferent to us being screwed when they are the ones choosing to screw us.
That misunderstands the position of the EU and other member states. They think we chose to screw ourselves. They have no interest in stopping us, mitigating the consequences, and above all, in sharing the problem.
But they will be sharing the problem. If our economy is damaged, their economies are damaged.
To prevent other member states from contemplating leaving it would appear that the EU would prefer a lose-lose outcome to a win-win.
Mr. Calum, can you say what that's for, or who determines the safespace has been violated by Wrongspeech?
A physiotherapy service !
No process established for determining if either party is in breach. A new role for the "Free" Church of Scotland - they played a key role in the 7 Great Scottish Witchunts back in the day, making Scotland the witch burning capital of Europe.
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
Corbyn's official policy is ultimately to leave both the EU and single market though get a relationship as close as possible to those and to end free movement. The official shadow cabinet policy is just to back a slightly longer transition period than the Tories, not to permanently stay in the single market and customs union as the likes of Chuka Umunna want.
Why do you like Goebbels, keep repeating the same stuff ? Repeating many times does not make it true. Did Corbyn tell you this himself ?
"This will mean that under a Labour government the UK would continue to abide by the EU’s free movement rules, accept the jurisdiction of the European court of justice on trade and economic issues, and pay into the EU budget for a period of years after Brexit, in the hope of lessening the shock of leaving to the UK economy. In a further move that will delight many pro-EU Labour backers, Jeremy Corbyn’s party will also leave open the option of the UK remaining a member of the customs union and single market for good, beyond the end of the transitional period."
You have quoted details of Labour's commitment to a transition period, a transition period even the Tories are committed to for 2 years NOT permanent single market and customs union membership.
You brainless individual, the Shadow Cabinet decision was taken in late August [ which is after July , by the way ].
"The decision to stay inside the single market and abide by all EU rules during the transitional period, and possibly beyond, was agreed after a week of intense discussion at the top of the party. It was signed off by the leadership and key members of the shadow cabinet on Thursday, according to Starmer’s office."
This is now official Labour policy. HYUFD, a failed Tory Council candidate does not decide Labour policies.
This is not a UK problem. It is a Conservative party problem. The only reason the government is holding out is because paying up would tear the Tories to pieces. It is classic party before country.
No, it's because the EU is demanding payment with no guarantee of outcome on the trade talks.
If the payments were contingent on a trade deal it would be easy.
As I see it, we've gone to a bar with mates and then ordered drinks. Before they arrive - we've said, hey look there's this great bar across the street - let's go there instead. And now we're saying, we won't pay for the drinks we've ordered unless you agree to come across the street. But the two issues are separate. Of course there will be some kind of trade deal (we like drinking together) - which obviously won't have everything we want in it - but that's compromise.
It's a stupid metaphor (not aimed at you since you didn't originate it).
There are 3 types of drinks:
1. The tab (those we have drink but not paid for) 2. The in process (those we have ordered but not yet paid for) 3. The aspirational (earlier in the evening one of our friends said "wouldn't it be great to buy some champagne" but we've not yet ordered or paid for them)
We've agreed to pay for 1&2 but not for group 3
That seems reasonable to me
It's not a perfect metaphor certainly.
I don't think we have agreed to pay for the tab yet. (although who knows what has been offered really)
We haven't agreed to pay pension liabilities according to this.
"The UK has said it will honour its existing financial obligations by ensuring no EU nation is worse off during the current budgetary period ending in 2020, a sum reported to be in the region of £20bn.
But the EU wants the UK to go further and contribute to what they say are longer-term liabilities, such as regional development spending and pension payments for British officials working for the EU and retired staff."
I agree that paying for group 3 doesn't seem fair. We should pay pensions liabilities IMO.
Doesn't seem to me the two sides are so far apart on this. But I think May will need Labour votes to get any kind of payment approved and certainly one amounting in the billions.
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain was lulled into complacency by the thought that as it was all very tricky , it shouldn't bother trying to find a solution. Waffle a bit and move on. That's not happening and may be for a positive reason. Having experienced something much better I suspect people are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
It was me who posed the question. I don't get how they could be indifferent to us being screwed when they are the ones choosing to screw us.
That misunderstands the position of the EU and other member states. They think we chose to screw ourselves. They have no interest in stopping us, mitigating the consequences, and above all, in sharing the problem.
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is
It was me who posed the question. I don't get how they could be indifferent to us being screwed when they are the ones choosing to screw us.
That misunderstands the position of the EU and other member states. They think we chose to screw ourselves. They have no interest in stopping us, mitigating the consequences, and above all, in sharing the problem.
But they will be sharing the problem. If our economy is damaged, their economies are damaged.
To prevent other member states from contemplating leaving it would appear that the EU would prefer a lose-lose outcome to a win-win.
No, the EU will agree a FTA with the UK a la Canada ultimately provided we pay for it.
It was me who posed the question. I don't get how they could be indifferent to us being screwed when they are the ones choosing to screw us.
That misunderstands the position of the EU and other member states. They think we chose to screw ourselves. They have no interest in stopping us, mitigating the consequences, and above all, in sharing the problem.
But they will be sharing the problem. If our economy is damaged, their economies are damaged.
To prevent other member states from contemplating leaving it would appear that the EU would prefer a lose-lose outcome to a win-win.
They will take the Win side of every Win/Lose equation while offering enough Win/Win's to keep us in agreement. Remember the default isn't the status quo, it's car crash. Wins are relative to the car crash. Relative to the status quo, it's Lose/Lose for us, I'm afraid. That's what we voted for. The EU seem to have it sussed. They don't always do that.
re @Richard_Nabavi "That's a lot of dosh by any standard - even if spread over, say, 5 years.."
"Billion" has become an easy word to chuck around without thinking too much. There are about 25 million households in the country, so £50 bn is £4,000 per household. It is 28% of total income tax receipts (£177.4 bn) in 2016-7. It really is a very big number
If it's 50bn and 25 million households. That would be 2000/household surely? It's definitely a lot of money though.
"Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )"
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
Corbyn's official policy is ultimately to leave both the EU and single market though get a relationship as close as possible to those and to end free movement. The official shadow cabinet policy is just to back a slightly longer transition period than the Tories, not to permanently stay in the single market and customs union as the likes of Chuka Umunna want.
Why do you like Goebbels, keep repeating the same stuff ? Repeating many times does not make e option of the UK remaining a member of the customs union and single market for good, beyond the end of the transitional period."
You have quoted details of Labour's commitment to a transition period, a transition period even the Tories are committed to for 2 years NOT permanent single market and customs union membership.
You brainless individual, the policies.
'DURING THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD', as you clearly cannot read your own words. So again no commitment by the Shadow Cabinet to permanent membership of the single market and customs union, in complete contrast to, say, the LDs.
A fanatical diehard Remainer like you cannot even get a firm commitment from Corbyn to permanent single market membership, let alone reversing Brexit.
As for being a 'failed Tory council candidate' I got a higher Tory voteshare in the ward than the Tory candidates in either 2014 and 2016 and will be back next year as I am on the District council candidates list, perhaps taking on the LD incumbent, perhaps in Loughton and the year after when the town council is up for full election and supporting the 1 Tory District Councillor in the ward.
Leavers who dig in and cry foul over the exit fee aren't serious about their own project. It's been clear since shortly after the referendum that a settlement of mid tens of billions of euros (perhaps haggled down a bit) deals with obligations and clears the way to exit and a new relationship. Serious Leavers would want to agree the payment as early as possible to maximise the chances of a successful Brexit. The money is the easy part. Everything else is much trickier.
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain was lulled into complacency by the thought that as it was all very tricky , it shouldn't bother trying to find a solution. Waffle a bit and move on. That's not happening and may be for a positive reason. Having experienced something much better I suspect people are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
It was me who posed the question. I don't get how they could be indifferent to us being screwed when they are the ones choosing to screw us.
That misunderstands the position of the EU and other member states. They think we chose to screw ourselves. They have no interest in stopping us, mitigating the consequences, and above all, in sharing the problem.
Telegraph op-ed on Third Country status and exports:
"What is really terrifying is that it has hardly yet begun to sink in that, entirely by our own choice, we could be sleepwalking towards the greatest disaster to hit our economy since World War Two."
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Yet Podemos will still hold the balance of power in Catalonia on current polling.
I know. The point is that this does not lead to anything. There will be no majority for UDI. That is a win for Madrid.
Not if there is still a majority for an independence referendum, that does not remove the issue from the table.
The Comu at 7.6% was pro the referendum and is anti-Art 155.
No, the EU will agree a FTA with the UK a la Canada ultimately provided we pay for it.
I think there is a spectrum of more comprehensive deal + more payment to less comprehensive + less payment/no payment...
TM gives every indication she will choose the low end of that range. It's hard to see how she could agree anything else given the red lines on FOM, ECJ and pinkish line on payments.
I don't think we would pay for a Canada style deal - that would be odd, although I suppose can't be ruled out if Liam Fox is in charge...
It was me who posed the question. I don't get how they could be indifferent to us being screwed when they are the ones choosing to screw us.
That misunderstands the position of the EU and other member states. They think we chose to screw ourselves. They have no interest in stopping us, mitigating the consequences, and above all, in sharing the problem.
So why have they not walked away then?
Because the EU think we will agree things that limit the damage of Brexit to THEM, as I do and, as by implication, Richard does in his header, even if he doesn't like it. And if we don't, the EU can manage. It's more or less take it or leave it, although we have some room for haggle.
Mr. kle4, must admit I've forgotten most of it. I do remember the cakeological singularity, though.
And Garland making them all fall down (you probably know this already but that's a reference to a genuine translation failure back in the days when "All your base are belong to us" actually happened).
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Yet Podemos will still hold the balance of power in Catalonia on current polling.
I know. The point is that this does not lead to anything. There will be no majority for UDI. That is a win for Madrid.
Not if there is still a majority for an independence referendum, that does not remove the issue from the table.
The Comu at 7.6% was pro the referendum and is anti-Art 155.
True though on current polls it will still be Podemos not Comu who hold the balance of power.
No, the EU will agree a FTA with the UK a la Canada ultimately provided we pay for it.
I think there is a spectrum of more comprehensive deal + more payment to less comprehensive + less payment/no payment...
TM gives every indication she will choose the low end of that range. It's hard to see how she could agree anything else given the red lines on FOM, ECJ and pinkish line on payments.
I don't think we would pay for a Canada style deal - that would be odd, although I suppose can't be ruled out if Liam Fox is in charge...
It looks quite likely May will pay for a Canada style FTA on current trends
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Yet Podemos will still hold the balance of power in Catalonia on current polling.
I know. The point is that this does not lead to anything. There will be no majority for UDI. That is a win for Madrid.
Not if there is still a majority for an independence referendum, that does not remove the issue from the table.
Looks like more deadlock in Catalonia though a separatist party will win the largest number of seats but their will be no separatist overall majority.
DeadlockWill unionist ones?
An election where the separatist ERC wins most seats and Podemos holds the balance of power as the polls are suggesting I don't think resolves anything.
It doesn't, but it also halts the forward march of separatism - that is all Madrid can reasonably hope for right now, It buys time to find a constitutional solution.
Provided Podemos comes out against independence and the PP offers Catalonia more autonomy, both big ifs.
Podemos has already come out against UDI. The PP is a bigger sticking Spanish election is due before the next Catalan one.
Yes but there will still be a majority in the Catalan Parliament for an official independence referendum with Podemos support. It is up to the PP and the Spanish Senate whether they agree and offer more autonomy as an incentive to Catalans to vote No.
Podemos will back a referendum. It will not support its outcome if the referendum is not held within the framework of the Spanish constitution. It is cake and eat it stuff, which is probably one of the reasons why Podemos support is falling in Catalonia and across Spain.
Yet Podemos will still hold the balance of power in Catalonia on current polling.
I know. The point is that this does not lead to anything. There will be no majority for UDI. That is a win for Madrid.
Not if there is still a majority for an independence referendum, that does not remove the issue from the table.
It removes the UDI outcome.
Yet it restores the referendum issue which was the original cause of the crisis in the first place.
Who on earth is managing the Tory comms?Can't they see putting Hammond tomorrow in the passenger seat of a driverless car is not an image of "Strong and Stable" government? Or is Hammond being stitched up by the Tory Brexit crazies and set up to fail to be the next out of the cabinet?Is he being set up to fail? Whoever they are,I think their problem does not emanate from Marx but from the influence of the Marks Bros because this is a satire on their fantastic films. Hammond as Groucho anyone?Damien Green as Harpo,the silent one?
Who on earth is managing the Tory comms?Can't they see putting Hammond tomorrow in the passenger seat of a driverless car is not an image of "Strong and Stable" government? Or is Hammond being stitched up by the Tory Brexit crazies and set up to fail to be the next out of the cabinet?Is he being set up to fail? Whoever they are,I think their problem does not emanate from Marx but from the influence of the Marks Bros because this is a satire on their fantastic films. Hammond as Groucho anyone?Damien Green as Harpo,the silent one?
Perhaps they're trying to give the image of technological progress, higher productivity and increased usable time.
Of course the development of driverless vehicles exposes HS2 as being an even bigger waste of resources.
A tweet from someone I've never heard of about an unidentified person talking about internal polling ???
Must be true.
Meanwhile back in the real world.
‘From someone who you’ve never heard of’ implies that he’s some random person, he’s a political correspondent on ITV news
Obviously they aren’t going to say who they’re talking about, these things never work out that way.
Meanwhile back in the real world, and Tories still not learning from the last election when they dismiss all information that didn’t fit the preferred narrative.
No, the EU will agree a FTA with the UK a la Canada ultimately provided we pay for it.
I think there is a spectrum of more comprehensive deal + more payment to less comprehensive + less payment/no payment...
TM gives every indication she will choose the low end of that range. It's hard to see how she could agree anything else given the red lines on FOM, ECJ and pinkish line on payments.
I don't think we would pay for a Canada style deal - that would be odd, although I suppose can't be ruled out if Liam Fox is in charge...
It looks quite likely May will pay for a Canada style FTA on current trends
That would be a very poor result for the UK. I do think it's unlikely though.
A tweet from someone I've never heard of about an unidentified person talking about internal polling ???
Must be true.
Meanwhile back in the real world.
There is certainly something very special about an attack, based solely on a poll, on those who continue to base their entire political analysis on polls. One to savour.
re @Richard_Nabavi "That's a lot of dosh by any standard - even if spread over, say, 5 years.."
"Billion" has become an easy word to chuck around without thinking too much. There are about 25 million households in the country, so £50 bn is £4,000 per household. It is 28% of total income tax receipts (£177.4 bn) in 2016-7. It really is a very big number
If it's 50bn and 25 million households. That would be 2000/household surely? It's definitely a lot of money though.
Richard Nabavi's comments above can basically be summarised as follows:
1. The UK will leave a club but will pay an additional two years subscription [ even though it will be a transition period in which the UK will be a member for all practical purposes ]
2. Thereafter, the UK should be allowed to enjoy those privileges and facilities of the club that it wants to enjoy and will not have to follow those rules it does not want to.
And, for that the UK will not pay anything at all.
Why should anyone be a club member ?
If the UK is not allowed these then the Europeans are reminded of some future "revenge" conflict.
The 'exit bill' is, apparently, payable even if we go to WTO terms. So your point 2 is nonsense.
Even if we sign a trade deal, like Canada, it would not be normal to pay vast sums for the privilege. A trade deal is a two-way thing: they offer us favourable access to their market, and we offer them favourable access to our market.
If they don't want to sign a trade deal with us, that would be a pity but it's entirely up to them. In that case, they should say so, and they should engage in friendly and constructive talks to ensure that we can move to WTO terms in an orderly fashion, without disruption.
The EU may think that the bill is payable even if we go with WTO, but this is totally unenforceable. And since the UKs legal advice is that nothing is payable, the EU won't get a penny if they don't do a deal at all.
There is no way that the UK can or should pay anything for a Canada type deal, or make any concessions on sovereignty, immigration etc. If the EU want that, they will need to offer a quasi SM approach (which does not include FOM obviously). From what we hear, they won't offer that, so the only game is an improved CETA deal that adds in services or a WTO outcome. If a decent CETA plus deal is on the table a deal can be done on the Brexit bill.
Agree with your last point - if they want a deal, great. If not, fine.
Comments
Also whether the candidates are in jail and unable to campaign.
It seems to me the problem is (a) some misread the signs and/or don't know how to make a pass, so misjudge it, and, (b) if rejected, either don't get it, or think it's a sign of playing hard to get, so still keep on trying.
One should be forgiven the former, with some gentle feedback, but not excused the latter. And in each case it will be a question of degree and context.
The solution is not the puritan one that men or women should cease any sexual interest in each other forevermore in the workplace, nor is that feasible.
They aren't asking for money up front.
They are asking for more detail on how we propose to settle EU accounts.
+ detail on Ireland which i think is trickier.
Whereas the UK are saying - we will honour our obligations by ensuring no EU country is worse off but we haven't committed to sorting out the pensions thing, and other longer term liabilities.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42027859
I think your solution sounds fine and is basically where we will end up.
The Irish issue seems tougher to me.
Edit: I've just read that Germany thinks the UK should not be entitled to a share of assets. That's illogical if we are on the hook for liabilities.
In the metaphor of Juncker, if we are paying for the beers we all ordered - the UK should be able to take ours for the road.
The Bank of England has of course now started to increase interest rates anyway.
Jon Ashworth asked how much he would pay to exit EU - answer subject to negotiation (government position )
How much would you increase nurses pay - no figure but something
Words can be powerful though - there was a fantasy webcomic I once read, famous for its anticlimactic jokes, and in one such instance the 'heroes' defeated a villain by telling a joke so bad it killed him. Good times
Professor Novoselov, 36, known as Kostya, first worked with Professor Geim, 51, as a PhD-student in the Netherlands. He subsequently followed Geim to the United Kingdom. Both of them originally studied and began their careers as physicists in Russia.
So "our graphene opportunity" was Russia's graphene opportunity if we are being nationalist.
1. The UK will leave a club but will pay an additional two years subscription [ even though it will be a transition period in which the UK will be a member for all practical purposes ]
2. Thereafter, the UK should be allowed to enjoy those privileges and facilities of the club that it wants to enjoy and will not have to follow those rules it does not want to.
And, for that the UK will not pay anything at all.
Why should anyone be a club member ?
If the UK is not allowed these then the Europeans are reminded of some future "revenge" conflict.
https://twitter.com/naebD/status/932204179589910528
Picking up a couple of points:
- I don't see how anyone can regard the EU demands as 'trifling'. As I understand it, they are demanding some unspecific but large figure, in the region of €60bn to €100bn, in addition to any payments during the transitional period and in addition to any on-going payments we might make for participating in specific EU programmes. That's a lot of dosh by any standard - even if spread over, say, 5 years, it's still a chunky dent in the national budget. It would require savings from the national budget comparable to those which the opposition parties lambasted in the past as 'wholly unrealistic':
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/03/autumn-statement-2014-george-osborne-spending-cuts
- In any case, you can't have it both ways. If the sum is trifling, and simply relates to existing liabilities, why are the EU27 making such a fuss about it and trying to use it as a lever in the talks before even beginning to talk about the on-going relationship? It is, after all, even more 'trifling' for them than it is for us, as a proportion of GDP. If it were just a technical issue, it could be delegated to a technical committee to quantify the liability. The truth is that the EU position is completely unsupported by the treaties, and indeed directly contradicts Article 50. The figures quoted are completely out of proportion to our annual budget contributions as full members. The demand might not be intended as blackmail, but it certainly looks like it..
- There are three possible outcomes from this. Either we give in to the blackmail, which will seriously damage the UK public finances, leave an enormous amount of bad feeling and provide an opening for anti-EU politicians to exploit, or Theresa May won't be able to get agreement from parliament, which would scupper the talks, or the EU backs down and becomes more reasonable, which would be overwhelmingly in the interests of both sides. I hope it will be the third of these, but I'm not confident that it will.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/kate-shea-baird/podemos-cat-among-pigeons-in-catalonia
The PP still lead on 30% to 24% for the PSOE on the latest Spanish poll even if their support has slipped slightly.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Spanish_general_election
That is a really good news story
Nothing. Truth be told, we will not leave the EU, as it is understood.
We will seek to be in the Single Market and in the Customs Union. Until those objectives are achieved, we will be in a transition period of unlimited duration. So, we will be, in effect, where we are now.
That is the official shadow cabinet policy.
"Billion" has become an easy word to chuck around without thinking too much. There are about 25 million households in the country, so £50 bn is £4,000 per household. It is 28% of total income tax receipts (£177.4 bn) in 2016-7.
It really is a very big number
David Davis gave a speech last week in Berlin that apparently bombed. It is clear that our chief negotiator hasn't spent even sixty seconds considering what the other side wants. He knows what he thinks they ought to want but hasn't a clue about what they actually do want. Britain generally doesn't understand the EU and cares even less. One of the paradoxes of Brexit is that Britain will be forced to understand more and care more about the EU from the outside than it ever did as a member. People who voted Leave because they don't much like the EU and wish it will go away, will be disappointed to find the EU impacting on their lives more after leaving than it did before.
Rochdale Pioneer, I think, asked a couple of days ago: Is the EU trying to keep us in or are they trying to screw us? The answer is No to the first and they are supremely indifferent, rather than malevolent, for the second. They reckon the ship has sailed on the UK's EU membership, so they will not invest any political or diplomatic capital on us. If we are screwed it's our problem, not theirs. They have absolutely no intention of making it their problem.
Ireland is shaping up to be a big thing for those of us interested in Brexit outcomes. Britain was lulled into complacency by the thought that as it was all very tricky , it shouldn't bother trying to find a solution. Waffle a bit and move on. That's not happening and may be for a positive reason. Having experienced something much better I suspect people are motivated by NOT returning to the dark past, rather than being driven back there. The Good Friday Agreement made the Northern Irish border ambiguous. Brexit removes that ambiguity. People may choose the no border of a de facto united Ireland rather than reinforcing it. The whole point of Northern Ireland is that Unionists say how things are done there. After Brexit they may no longer have the numbers.
Interesting comment in the Sun, dripping with condescension towards the Irish Taoiseach for presuming to use the leverage of the EU against a diplomatically diminished UK. I am sure that view is widely held in Whitehall and Westminster. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4940971/irelands-naive-young-prime-minister-should-shut-his-gob-on-brexit-and-grow-up/
Even if we sign a trade deal, like Canada, it would not be normal to pay vast sums for the privilege. A trade deal is a two-way thing: they offer us favourable access to their market, and we offer them favourable access to our market.
If they don't want to sign a trade deal with us, that would be a pity but it's entirely up to them. In that case, they should say so, and they should engage in friendly and constructive talks to ensure that we can move to WTO terms in an orderly fashion, without disruption.
Surprised he didn't get a thumping in the Spanish embassy.
"This will mean that under a Labour government the UK would continue to abide by the EU’s free movement rules, accept the jurisdiction of the European court of justice on trade and economic issues, and pay into the EU budget for a period of years after Brexit, in the hope of lessening the shock of leaving to the UK economy. In a further move that will delight many pro-EU Labour backers, Jeremy Corbyn’s party will also leave open the option of the UK remaining a member of the customs union and single market for good, beyond the end of the transitional period."
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2017/aug/26/labour-calls-for-lengthy-transitional-period-post-brexit
Lets hear that loud and clear from Corbyn and the shadow cabinet
Attributed to Everett Dirksen at US Senate Committee.
See https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Everett_Dirksen
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/18/mps-kremlin-propaganda-channel-rt
No doubt if we agree to the EU's exit bill demands, they'll be demanding a lot more for an FTA. And having paid a lot to get around the negotiating table, can anyone see our government walking away and deciding not to chuck good money after bad?
Corbyn in July on Marr 'We will leave the single market.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4723480/Corbyn-says-Labour-leave-single-market.html
You have quoted details of Labour's commitment to a transition period, a transition period even the Tories are committed to for 2 years NOT permanent single market and customs union membership.
To prevent other member states from contemplating leaving it would appear that the EU would prefer a lose-lose outcome to a win-win.
Gone by the new year?
No process established for determining if either party is in breach. A new role for the "Free" Church of Scotland - they played a key role in the 7 Great Scottish Witchunts back in the day, making Scotland the witch burning capital of Europe.
"The decision to stay inside the single market and abide by all EU rules during the transitional period, and possibly beyond, was agreed after a week of intense discussion at the top of the party. It was signed off by the leadership and key members of the shadow cabinet on Thursday, according to Starmer’s office."
This is now official Labour policy. HYUFD, a failed Tory Council candidate does not decide Labour policies.
In my forgetful defence, there are something daft like 800 episodes.
I don't think we have agreed to pay for the tab yet. (although who knows what has been offered really)
We haven't agreed to pay pension liabilities according to this.
"The UK has said it will honour its existing financial obligations by ensuring no EU nation is worse off during the current budgetary period ending in 2020, a sum reported to be in the region of £20bn.
But the EU wants the UK to go further and contribute to what they say are longer-term liabilities, such as regional development spending and pension payments for British officials working for the EU and retired staff."
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42027859
I agree that paying for group 3 doesn't seem fair.
We should pay pensions liabilities IMO.
Doesn't seem to me the two sides are so far apart on this.
But I think May will need Labour votes to get any kind of payment approved and certainly one amounting in the billions.
It's definitely a lot of money though.
A fanatical diehard Remainer like you cannot even get a firm commitment from Corbyn to permanent single market membership, let alone reversing Brexit.
As for being a 'failed Tory council candidate' I got a higher Tory voteshare in the ward than the Tory candidates in either 2014 and 2016 and will be back next year as I am on the District council candidates list, perhaps taking on the LD incumbent, perhaps in Loughton and the year after when the town council is up for full election and supporting the 1 Tory District Councillor in the ward.
That said, good on the RN for helping out, and I’m sure they’ll do everything they can to find the missing sub.
"What is really terrifying is that it has hardly yet begun to sink in that, entirely by our own choice, we could be sleepwalking towards the greatest disaster to hit our economy since World War Two."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/19/driving-wall-stubborn-trade-talk/
TM gives every indication she will choose the low end of that range.
It's hard to see how she could agree anything else given the red lines on FOM, ECJ and pinkish line on payments.
I don't think we would pay for a Canada style deal - that would be odd, although I suppose can't be ruled out if Liam Fox is in charge...
And Garland making them all fall down (you probably know this already but that's a reference to a genuine translation failure back in the days when "All your base are belong to us" actually happened).
Edited extra bit: anyway, must be off.
https://twitter.com/paulbranditv/status/932176933797933056
Must be true.
Meanwhile back in the real world.
https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/932217563140050946
Whoever they are,I think their problem does not emanate from Marx but from the influence of the Marks Bros because this is a satire on their fantastic films.
Hammond as Groucho anyone?Damien Green as Harpo,the silent one?
Of course the development of driverless vehicles exposes HS2 as being an even bigger waste of resources.
Obviously they aren’t going to say who they’re talking about, these things never work out that way.
Meanwhile back in the real world, and Tories still not learning from the last election when they dismiss all information that didn’t fit the preferred narrative.
I do think it's unlikely though.
There is no way that the UK can or should pay anything for a Canada type deal, or make any concessions on sovereignty, immigration etc. If the EU want that, they will need to offer a quasi SM approach (which does not include FOM obviously). From what we hear, they won't offer that, so the only game is an improved CETA deal that adds in services or a WTO outcome. If a decent CETA plus deal is on the table a deal can be done on the Brexit bill.
Agree with your last point - if they want a deal, great. If not, fine.