Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boundary conditions. How Brexit might be helping to lay the gr

24

Comments

  • Options
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,867
    After this weeks meeting of Commonwealth leaders I assume the next big thing that would add to feelings of independence would be Lizzy passing. I think she is the singular thing holding many who otherwise don't care strongly to the notion of the UK, and Charles will reduce much of that to ash. For old and young she is a figure they understand, know and respect, and Charles or Will (if Charles abdicates in favour) cannot claim that.

    Considering it is not unreasonable to assume that someone of the Queen's age could pass at a moment's notice, a big culture shift away from the monarch / UK could coincide with all the Brexit bustle.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Dubliner said:

    FF43 said:

    Charles said:

    As a quick solution, the six most north-easterly counties were retained within the UK on their existing county lines.

    Not exactly. The nine counties of Ulster got to vote to decide whether to join the IFS or to remain part of the UK. In three countries (Donegal, Cavan and Moneghan) voted to leave, while the rest wanted to remain.

    The British establishment, being entirely reasonable, applied the democratic choices of the majority in each county, without asking them to reconsider.

    Are you sure there was a vote? My understanding is that the six counties "solution" was imposed by the UK government.
    You are right, though it would be nice if Charles could provide some evidence for his contention.
    It's been a long time since I studied that part of Irish history - I spent more time focused on O'Connell and Parnell (my interest is in the inevitability of history and whether there could have been anything done to prevent the rupture). So it's possible I got it wrong.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Population of the UK:

    1972: 56.09 million
    1988: 56.93 million

    Average increase of about 50,000 a year.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    There is a soft/zero border now.

    Wont change after Brexit because - neither ROI or Uk wants one.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    English and Welsh who support the Union with Scotland and Northern Ireland might see that as an argument for staying in the Single Market and Customs Union. It means no special arrangements for Northern Ireland and ultimately Scotland too.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    There is a soft/zero border now.

    Wont change after Brexit because - neither ROI or Uk wants one.

    It will be a border between the UK and the EU. Its status will depend on the agreement the UK and the EU reach. If there is no agreement there will be a rock hard border as that is what WTO rules will require.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    They need to be inventive with stamp duty.

    No stamp duty for first time buyers up to £500k+


    Other tax incentives may be desirable.

    Needs to be linked to a national insurance number or something to avoid abuse.
    First time buyers up to £500k!!??

    Dear god we are in a _lot_ of trouble.
    Stop clutching your pearls and visit the SE occasionally.

    Lots of 30 somethings buying with their partners up to this sort of price.

    A report a few days ago said first time buyers are at the highest level in 10 years
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,544

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:
    .
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    Don't see why. It is more of a problem for the government if they choose the harder border because of its knock on implications in the EU negotiations. The only solution to that problem that I can see is a very soft border with the EU generally so that the harder border is not so hard after all. FWIW that is where I think we will end up.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852
    Both sides in the Chinese civil war largely left it up to the Americans to fight the Japanese, so they could concentrate on shoring up their own positions. The nationalists and the communists separately won a significant battle against the Japanese.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    There is a soft/zero border now.

    Wont change after Brexit because - neither ROI or Uk wants one.

    It will be a border between the UK and the EU. Its status will depend on the agreement the UK and the EU reach. If there is no agreement there will be a rock hard border as that is what WTO rules will require.
    Again - neither the ROI nor the UK (including the DUP) want a border, plan to build a border, have any plans in place for a border, dont want to pay for a border nor see the need for a border.

    Under those circumstances - who would bet on their being a border of any sort of significance ?

  • Options
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:
    .
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    Don't see why. It is more of a problem for the government if they choose the harder border because of its knock on implications in the EU negotiations. The only solution to that problem that I can see is a very soft border with the EU generally so that the harder border is not so hard after all. FWIW that is where I think we will end up.

    The DUP would not allow that poll to take place as they would be on the losing side.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552
    edited February 2018
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they can have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.
    Jesus (or, Jaysus) - and all this because of Brexit?

    That sure as hell wasn't on the ballot paper. Edit: so it wasn't.
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I border?

    The SNP's May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    There is a soft/zero border now.

    Wont change after Brexit because - neither ROI or Uk wants one.

    It will be a border between the UK and the EU. Its status will depend on the agreement the UK and the EU reach. If there is no agreement there will be a rock hard border as that is what WTO rules will require.
    Again - neither the ROI nor the UK (including the DUP) want a border, plan to build a border, have any plans in place for a border, dont want to pay for a border nor see the need for a border.

    Under those circumstances - who would bet on their being a border of any sort of significance ?

    It will be a border between the EU and the UK. Both are part of the WTO and obliged to follow its rules. If they don't, there are consequences.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TGOHF said:

    Again - neither the ROI nor the UK (including the DUP) want a border, plan to build a border, have any plans in place for a border, dont want to pay for a border nor see the need for a border.

    TAKE BACK CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS !!!*

    *Except that one, obviously...
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852
    Anyway. What this header shows is English, Scottish and Irish politics getting mixed up in a very messy way. Not for the first time either.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,544

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:
    .
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    Don't see why. It is more of a problem for the government if they choose the harder border because of its knock on implications in the EU negotiations. The only solution to that problem that I can see is a very soft border with the EU generally so that the harder border is not so hard after all. FWIW that is where I think we will end up.

    The DUP would not allow that poll to take place as they would be on the losing side.
    Their solution is our solution. A FTA so comprehensive that the Border can (continue to be) politely ignored.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,934
    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)
  • Options
    stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Well of course Remoaners like the author were telling us as part of Project fear during the referendum that the Leave vote meant that Scotland would leave the UK almost immediately. When that didnt work out at the general election with the SNP losing seats, they have modified their Cassandra like warning of doom to secession within a generation.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:
    .
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    Don't see why. It is more of a problem for the government if they choose the harder border because of its knock on implications in the EU negotiations. The only solution to that problem that I can see is a very soft border with the EU generally so that the harder border is not so hard after all. FWIW that is where I think we will end up.

    The DUP would not allow that poll to take place as they would be on the losing side.
    Their solution is our solution. A FTA so comprehensive that the Border can (continue to be) politely ignored.

    The Brexit loons will no buy the compromises that entails (though it would certainly breeze through Parliament), so - again - it is a non-starter if May's priority continues to be her own survival rather than what is best for the country.

  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,867
    stevef said:

    Well of course Remoaners like the author were telling us as part of Project fear during the referendum that the Leave vote meant that Scotland would leave the UK almost immediately. When that didnt work out at the general election with the SNP losing seats, they have modified their Cassandra like warning of doom to secession within a generation.

    Wasn't the curse of Cassandra to tell true prophecy no one believes?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,091
    148grss said:

    After this weeks meeting of Commonwealth leaders I assume the next big thing that would add to feelings of independence would be Lizzy passing. I think she is the singular thing holding many who otherwise don't care strongly to the notion of the UK, and Charles will reduce much of that to ash. For old and young she is a figure they understand, know and respect, and Charles or Will (if Charles abdicates in favour) cannot claim that.

    Considering it is not unreasonable to assume that someone of the Queen's age could pass at a moment's notice, a big culture shift away from the monarch / UK could coincide with all the Brexit bustle.

    Australia will be a republic before she's cold.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Again - neither the ROI nor the UK (including the DUP) want a border, plan to build a border, have any plans in place for a border, dont want to pay for a border nor see the need for a border.

    TAKE BACK CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS !!!*

    *Except that one, obviously...
    Bizarre but not unexpected that you think that "control" means a Trump style Mexican fence.

    Control is the ability to choose.

  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I border?

    The SNP's May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    There is a soft/zero border now.

    Wont change after Brexit because - neither ROI or Uk wants one.

    It will be a border between the UK and the EU. Its status will depend on the agreement the UK and the EU reach. If there is no agreement there will be a rock hard border as that is what WTO rules will require.
    Again - neither the ROI nor the UK (including the DUP) want a border, plan to build a border, have any plans in place for a border, dont want to pay for a border nor see the need for a border.

    Under those circumstances - who would bet on their being a border of any sort of significance ?

    It will be a border between the EU and the UK. Both are part of the WTO and obliged to follow its rules. If they don't, there are consequences.
    Your doom-mongering doesn't survive contact with reality and real-politik.

  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    TOPPING said:

    Jesus (or, Jaysus) - and all this because of Brexit?

    That sure as hell wasn't on the ballot paper. Edit: so it wasn't.

    There will probably be a lot of that this year, so there will... ;)
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,544

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:
    .
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    Don't see why. It is more of a problem for the government if they choose the harder border because of its knock on implications in the EU negotiations. The only solution to that problem that I can see is a very soft border with the EU generally so that the harder border is not so hard after all. FWIW that is where I think we will end up.

    The DUP would not allow that poll to take place as they would be on the losing side.
    Their solution is our solution. A FTA so comprehensive that the Border can (continue to be) politely ignored.

    The Brexit loons will no buy the compromises that entails (though it would certainly breeze through Parliament), so - again - it is a non-starter if May's priority continues to be her own survival rather than what is best for the country.

    That is the declared policy and objective of the government. Whether they can achieve it is another matter as is the price that might have to be paid for it but there is no constituency for anything other than free trade with the EU in the Conservative party that I am aware of.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,187
    The indelible cynicism of Mitch McConnell, enabler of school shootings...
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/deeply-saddened/553478/
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552
    TGOHF said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    They need to be inventive with stamp duty.

    No stamp duty for first time buyers up to £500k+


    Other tax incentives may be desirable.

    Needs to be linked to a national insurance number or something to avoid abuse.
    First time buyers up to £500k!!??

    Dear god we are in a _lot_ of trouble.
    Stop clutching your pearls and visit the SE occasionally.

    Lots of 30 somethings buying with their partners up to this sort of price.

    I have no doubt. It is pretty amazing though.

    I suppose, however, that the difference now is that at £500k there are not 20-somethings getting on the housing ladder on their own, as they did in days gone by.

    *lets go pearls*
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    The wheels are starting to come off for the SNP. This was Alex Bell, Alex Salmond's former speech writer, in the Courier yesterday: https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion/alex-bell/600937/alex-bell-phoney-pete-wishart-asking-questions-20-years-late/

    Vicious attack on Pete Wishart and the mindless nonsense the SNP have been churning out for too long from someone who is instinctively very sympathetic. The need to address the real issues in Scotland and the Scottish economy has simply become too pressing to ignore.

    Alex Bell very sympathetic?! That’s just..weird.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited February 2018
    DavidL said:



    That is the declared policy and objective of the government. Whether they can achieve it is another matter as is the price that might have to be paid for it but there is no constituency for anything other than free trade with the EU in the Conservative party that I am aware of.

    Looking forward to SO's explaining the scenario where a crack team of Belgian and Luxembourgian special forces parachute into Sligo with 200 miles of barbed wire to protect the EU border.

    It could just happen ...
  • Options
    stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    148grss said:

    stevef said:

    Well of course Remoaners like the author were telling us as part of Project fear during the referendum that the Leave vote meant that Scotland would leave the UK almost immediately. When that didnt work out at the general election with the SNP losing seats, they have modified their Cassandra like warning of doom to secession within a generation.

    Wasn't the curse of Cassandra to tell true prophecy no one believes?
    Remoaners like to think so.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,003
    edited February 2018
    TGOHF said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    They need to be inventive with stamp duty.

    No stamp duty for first time buyers up to £500k+


    Other tax incentives may be desirable.

    Needs to be linked to a national insurance number or something to avoid abuse.
    First time buyers up to £500k!!??

    Dear god we are in a _lot_ of trouble.
    Stop clutching your pearls and visit the SE occasionally.

    Lots of 30 somethings buying with their partners up to this sort of price.

    Though nowhere near as many as two decades ago. They are also heavily mortgaged so very vulnerable to interest rate rises even to rates lowish by historical standards, let alone the 12% I paid on my first mortgage in 1992.

    Cheap money and lack of alternate investment return is a large part of house price inflation. That has to unwind at some point.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,544
    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    They need to be inventive with stamp duty.

    No stamp duty for first time buyers up to £500k+


    Other tax incentives may be desirable.

    Needs to be linked to a national insurance number or something to avoid abuse.
    First time buyers up to £500k!!??

    Dear god we are in a _lot_ of trouble.
    Stop clutching your pearls and visit the SE occasionally.

    Lots of 30 somethings buying with their partners up to this sort of price.

    I have no doubt. It is pretty amazing though.

    I suppose, however, that the difference now is that at £500k there are not 20-somethings getting on the housing ladder on their own, as they did in days gone by.

    *lets go pearls*
    The flat I bought as a first time buyer cost me £10,500. It seemed to border on recklessness at the time. You are not alone in finding FTBs taking on transactions like that amazing.
  • Options
    Charles said:

    Dubliner said:

    FF43 said:

    Charles said:

    As a quick solution, the six most north-easterly counties were retained within the UK on their existing county lines.

    Not exactly. The nine counties of Ulster got to vote to decide whether to join the IFS or to remain part of the UK. In three countries (Donegal, Cavan and Moneghan) voted to leave, while the rest wanted to remain.

    The British establishment, being entirely reasonable, applied the democratic choices of the majority in each county, without asking them to reconsider.

    Are you sure there was a vote? My understanding is that the six counties "solution" was imposed by the UK government.
    You are right, though it would be nice if Charles could provide some evidence for his contention.
    It's been a long time since I studied that part of Irish history - I spent more time focused on O'Connell and Parnell (my interest is in the inevitability of history and whether there could have been anything done to prevent the rupture). So it's possible I got it wrong.
    If an expensive education doesn’t train you to frame ignorance as lordly indifference, what’s the point of it?
  • Options
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    I border?

    The SNP's May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    There is a soft/zero border now.

    Wont change after Brexit because - neither ROI or Uk wants one.

    It will be a border between the UK and the EU. Its status will depend on the agreement the UK and the EU reach. If there is no agreement there will be a rock hard border as that is what WTO rules will require.
    Again - neither the ROI nor the UK (including the DUP) want a border, plan to build a border, have any plans in place for a border, dont want to pay for a border nor see the need for a border.

    Under those circumstances - who would bet on their being a border of any sort of significance ?

    It will be a border between the EU and the UK. Both are part of the WTO and obliged to follow its rules. If they don't, there are consequences.
    Your doom-mongering doesn't survive contact with reality and real-politik.

    What reality is that? If you seriously think that other third countries with which the EU has a land border are not going to bring WTO cases against the EU for ignoring its obligations on the UK border then you know absolutely nothing about realpolitik.

  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,867
    stevef said:

    148grss said:

    stevef said:

    Well of course Remoaners like the author were telling us as part of Project fear during the referendum that the Leave vote meant that Scotland would leave the UK almost immediately. When that didnt work out at the general election with the SNP losing seats, they have modified their Cassandra like warning of doom to secession within a generation.

    Wasn't the curse of Cassandra to tell true prophecy no one believes?
    Remoaners like to think so.
    So you're saying that the whole point of Cassandra mythology was not punishment for refusal of God lovemaking, and the general human nature of confirmation bias, but instead about a false prophet? I'm just saying that the entire point of Cassandra was that she was a) correct and b) not listened to. Comparing "Remoaners" to Cassandra is the opposite metaphor to what you want (although it might prove ironic in years to come).
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    If anything now we are leaving the single market and customs union an independent Scotland that joined the EEA would be even more difficult on economic grounds as even with a FTA that would see some tariffs with the rUK just as the UK is likely to have with the Republic of Ireland. Implementing monitoring measures as will be used at the Irish border may make it practically simpler but does not change that fact

    At school weren't you ever taught to use punctuation? Your lack thereof garbles many of your posts including the excellent example above.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    They need to be inventive with stamp duty.

    No stamp duty for first time buyers up to £500k+


    Other tax incentives may be desirable.

    Needs to be linked to a national insurance number or something to avoid abuse.
    First time buyers up to £500k!!??

    Dear god we are in a _lot_ of trouble.
    Stop clutching your pearls and visit the SE occasionally.

    Lots of 30 somethings buying with their partners up to this sort of price.

    I have no doubt. It is pretty amazing though.

    I suppose, however, that the difference now is that at £500k there are not 20-somethings getting on the housing ladder on their own, as they did in days gone by.

    *lets go pearls*
    The flat I bought as a first time buyer cost me £10,500. It seemed to border on recklessness at the time. You are not alone in finding FTBs taking on transactions like that amazing.
    I bought my first flat for £275,000 in Chelsea...
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:
    .
    I really don't think so. The Northern Irish economy is already much more integrated with the South than Scotland is with anywhere outside the UK. The sea border makes controlling immigration and trade to the mainland pretty straightforward even if NI has a "soft" and porous border with the Republic. I don't see how that can work in Scotland. If we joined the EU and had freedom of movement again how would England control its own immigration without a hard border?

    The SNP's best hope is that the UK ends up with a FTA with the EU so that we still have the benefits of the SM. If that is achieved some but not all of the problems will recede, as they will in NI. The SNP leadership must be secretly cheering May on.
    I see. So your preferred Northern Irish solution is to shaft the DUP.
    I think the Northern Irish should be given a choice between being more integrated with the Republic and more integrated with rUK with a harder border. Its a tough choice for them but it is fatuous to pretend that they cane have their cake and eat it (to coin a phrase). My guess is that they will go for the soft border with the republic.

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    Don't end up.

    The DUP would not allow that poll to take place as they would be on the losing side.
    Their solution is our solution. A FTA so comprehensive that the Border can (continue to be) politely ignored.

    The Brexit country.

    That is the declared policy and objective of the government. Whether they can achieve it is another matter as is the price that might have to be paid for it but there is no constituency for anything other than free trade with the EU in the Conservative party that I am aware of.

    Free trade with conditions, which May has set in order to keep the Mogglodytes onside. The stated preference of the loons is No Deal rather than compromise. There is no feasible solution to the Irish border issue that does not include a form of customs union for Northern Ireland at least. There is no form of customs union with the EU that will keep the DUP and the loons onside.

  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2018
    Alastair makes a very astute point about the Scottish border.

    However, I'd pick up one point which is often made (and repeated by Southam in the post just before this one!) but obviously wrong:

    If Britain is to be outside the customs union, as hardline Leavers are suddenly insisting is essential to honour the Brexit vote, the UK is going to need to put in place a system for monitoring the new trade boundary.

    If it fails to do so, it will in substance be giving the EU preferential access over other nations with which the UK trades. It is hard to see how that is consistent with Britain’s Most Favoured Nation obligations under the WTO, under which it must offer all WTO members the terms offered to the otherwise most favoured trading partner.


    Leaving aside the point I've made before, which is that no-one seems to be able to come up with any examples of the WTO rules being used to object to streamlined administrative customs procedures, there's an even more obvious reason why this is wrong: the government and the EU27 are not suggesting that we should fall back on pure WTO terms. As soon as we have a FTA in place (NOT necessarily a Customs Union), by definition the Most Favoured Nation discrimination rule doesn't apply.
  • Options
    The border issue may be less relevant next time there's a Scottish IndyRef (*if* there's a next time). However, the currency issue will as relevant and the oil-running-out issue will be even more relevant.

    But to get another referendum, there needs to be a pro-SIndyRef2 majority in Holyrood, which probably won't now come about until the SNP have lost power, Someone has replaced them as the Scottish government and then have themselves lost power. We're talking maybe 15 years down the line.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,187

    Alastair makes a very astute point about the Scottish border.

    However, I'd pick up one point which is often made but obviously wrong:

    If Britain is to be outside the customs union, as hardline Leavers are suddenly insisting is essential to honour the Brexit vote, the UK is going to need to put in place a system for monitoring the new trade boundary.

    If it fails to do so, it will in substance be giving the EU preferential access over other nations with which the UK trades. It is hard to see how that is consistent with Britain’s Most Favoured Nation obligations under the WTO, under which it must offer all WTO members the terms offered to the otherwise most favoured trading partner.


    Leaving aside the point I've made before, which is that no-one seems to be able to come up with any examples of the WTO rules being used to object to streamlined administrative customs procedures, there's an even more obvious reason why this is wrong: the government and the EU27 are not suggesting that we should fall back on pure WTO terms. As soon as we have a FTA in place (NOT necessarily a Customs Union), by definition the Most Favoured Nation discrimination rule doesn't apply.

    And in any event, how would we be discriminating ?
    We could say that we'd perfectly happy to offer the same terms to any other nation with a land border (though that does of coursere-inforce the thrust of Alastair's article)
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited February 2018



    What reality is that? If you seriously think that other third countries with which the EU has a land border are not going to bring WTO cases against the EU for ignoring its obligations on the UK border then you know absolutely nothing about realpolitik.

    Set out the series of events and likely implementation plan for a border then...

    Who pays, who constructs it , what does it look like, when will it come into force ?

  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,867
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    They need to be inventive with stamp duty.

    No stamp duty for first time buyers up to £500k+


    Other tax incentives may be desirable.

    Needs to be linked to a national insurance number or something to avoid abuse.
    First time buyers up to £500k!!??

    Dear god we are in a _lot_ of trouble.
    Stop clutching your pearls and visit the SE occasionally.

    Lots of 30 somethings buying with their partners up to this sort of price.

    I have no doubt. It is pretty amazing though.

    I suppose, however, that the difference now is that at £500k there are not 20-somethings getting on the housing ladder on their own, as they did in days gone by.

    *lets go pearls*
    The flat I bought as a first time buyer cost me £10,500. It seemed to border on recklessness at the time. You are not alone in finding FTBs taking on transactions like that amazing.
    My parents in their early 20s got a 3 bedroom semi in '95/'96 for a £55k mortgage; same house today is ~ 6x that. Neither went to uni, did lower / middling admin jobs, could afford it. I'm out of uni, into the job market at ~£20k and mortgages for me and a partner could not get a family home. Building more houses, especially in the private sector, doesn't fix that. It's a mixture of stagnant wages, lack of investment outside of London and general pisspoor economic management. In stoke they were selling empty houses to locals at £1 a few years back, as long as someone could prove they'd lived in the area for x number of years and could afford to renovate. The housing crisis is not simply one of not enough houses, but instead not enough economic support for people to live comfortably where they need to.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,544

    The border issue may be less relevant next time there's a Scottish IndyRef (*if* there's a next time). However, the currency issue will as relevant and the oil-running-out issue will be even more relevant.

    But to get another referendum, there needs to be a pro-SIndyRef2 majority in Holyrood, which probably won't now come about until the SNP have lost power, Someone has replaced them as the Scottish government and then have themselves lost power. We're talking maybe 15 years down the line.

    One's almost tempted to say a generation.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Dubliner said:

    FF43 said:

    Charles said:

    As a quick solution, the six most north-easterly counties were retained within the UK on their existing county lines.

    Not exactly. The nine counties of Ulster got to vote to decide whether to join the IFS or to remain part of the UK. In three countries (Donegal, Cavan and Moneghan) voted to leave, while the rest wanted to remain.

    The British establishment, being entirely reasonable, applied the democratic choices of the majority in each county, without asking them to reconsider.

    Are you sure there was a vote? My understanding is that the six counties "solution" was imposed by the UK government.
    You are right, though it would be nice if Charles could provide some evidence for his contention.
    It's been a long time since I studied that part of Irish history - I spent more time focused on O'Connell and Parnell (my interest is in the inevitability of history and whether there could have been anything done to prevent the rupture). So it's possible I got it wrong.
    If an expensive education doesn’t train you to frame ignorance as lordly indifference, what’s the point of it?

    It trains you to tell the truth.

    On the couple of previous occasions you are referencing, I wasn't that interested in the topic.

    Here I just got it wrong.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,544

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    They are not going to get that choice. It would bring down the government.

    Don't end up.

    The DUP would not allow that poll to take place as they would be on the losing side.
    Their solution is our solution. A FTA so comprehensive that the Border can (continue to be) politely ignored.

    The Brexit country.

    That is the declared policy and objective of the government. Whether they can achieve it is another matter as is the price that might have to be paid for it but there is no constituency for anything other than free trade with the EU in the Conservative party that I am aware of.

    Free trade with conditions, which May has set in order to keep the Mogglodytes onside. The stated preference of the loons is No Deal rather than compromise. There is no feasible solution to the Irish border issue that does not include a form of customs union for Northern Ireland at least. There is no form of customs union with the EU that will keep the DUP and the loons onside.

    Well, we shall see. It seems to me that the attempt to impose conditions so far is on the side of the EU, not the UK.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2018
    Nigelb said:

    Alastair makes a very astute point about the Scottish border.

    However, I'd pick up one point which is often made but obviously wrong:

    If Britain is to be outside the customs union, as hardline Leavers are suddenly insisting is essential to honour the Brexit vote, the UK is going to need to put in place a system for monitoring the new trade boundary.

    If it fails to do so, it will in substance be giving the EU preferential access over other nations with which the UK trades. It is hard to see how that is consistent with Britain’s Most Favoured Nation obligations under the WTO, under which it must offer all WTO members the terms offered to the otherwise most favoured trading partner.


    Leaving aside the point I've made before, which is that no-one seems to be able to come up with any examples of the WTO rules being used to object to streamlined administrative customs procedures, there's an even more obvious reason why this is wrong: the government and the EU27 are not suggesting that we should fall back on pure WTO terms. As soon as we have a FTA in place (NOT necessarily a Customs Union), by definition the Most Favoured Nation discrimination rule doesn't apply.

    And in any event, how would we be discriminating ?
    We could say that we'd perfectly happy to offer the same terms to any other nation with a land border (though that does of coursere-inforce the thrust of Alastair's article)
    We wouldn't be, but the argument is that the EU would. This argument is wrong if there's an FTA in place, for the reasons I give. (I presume that without an FTA, the WTO non-discrimination rule applies at the EU level. Perhaps it doesn't, and applies to Ireland specifically, in which that's another reason why the argument is wrong.)
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,544
    Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    TOPPING said:

    TGOHF said:

    Elliot said:

    This is what will destroy the Tories:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43075099

    "The biggest decline in home ownership in the last 20 years has been among middle-income 25 to 34-year-olds, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said.

    In 1995-96, 65% of this group owned a home, but just 27% do in 2015-16, with the biggest drop in south-east England."

    The worst part of it for them is that it is spreading out in the home counties, where their core vote is. Right now they know they have the problem but don't seem to grasp just how much house building is needed to resolve it. Even status quo unaffordability will screw them. They need to actually surpass population growth to turn things round.

    They need to be inventive with stamp duty.

    No stamp duty for first time buyers up to £500k+


    Other tax incentives may be desirable.

    Needs to be linked to a national insurance number or something to avoid abuse.
    First time buyers up to £500k!!??

    Dear god we are in a _lot_ of trouble.
    Stop clutching your pearls and visit the SE occasionally.

    Lots of 30 somethings buying with their partners up to this sort of price.

    I have no doubt. It is pretty amazing though.

    I suppose, however, that the difference now is that at £500k there are not 20-somethings getting on the housing ladder on their own, as they did in days gone by.

    *lets go pearls*
    The flat I bought as a first time buyer cost me £10,500. It seemed to border on recklessness at the time. You are not alone in finding FTBs taking on transactions like that amazing.
    I bought my first flat for £275,000 in Chelsea...
    Blimey. My current house didn't cost half of that when we bought it 26 years ago.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Trump the 3rd worst President of the modern ers says a new US poll after Nixon and LBJ.

    Obama is the 3rd best after Reagan and JFK

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-obama-worst-best-poll-808238?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

    It speaks volumes about what a fucked up country the US has become that LBJ's great reforms on civil rights and on building a small safety net for the poor/elderly put him more beyond the pale than Trump.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump the 3rd worst President of the modern ers says a new US poll after Nixon and LBJ.

    Obama is the 3rd best after Reagan and JFK

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-obama-worst-best-poll-808238?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

    It speaks volumes about what a fucked up country the US has become that LBJ's great reforms on civil rights and on building a small safety net for the poor/elderly put him more beyond the pale than Trump.
    JFK was probably the worst of them all.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump the 3rd worst President of the modern ers says a new US poll after Nixon and LBJ.

    Obama is the 3rd best after Reagan and JFK

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-obama-worst-best-poll-808238?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

    It speaks volumes about what a fucked up country the US has become that LBJ's great reforms on civil rights and on building a small safety net for the poor/elderly put him more beyond the pale than Trump.
    JFK was probably the worst of them all.
    Die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain?
  • Options
    PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274
    DavidL said:

    The border issue may be less relevant next time there's a Scottish IndyRef (*if* there's a next time). However, the currency issue will as relevant and the oil-running-out issue will be even more relevant.

    But to get another referendum, there needs to be a pro-SIndyRef2 majority in Holyrood, which probably won't now come about until the SNP have lost power, Someone has replaced them as the Scottish government and then have themselves lost power. We're talking maybe 15 years down the line.

    One's almost tempted to say a generation.
    Is the alternative to the SNP at Holyrooda Unionist grand coalistion?
  • Options

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852
    edited February 2018
    Richard Nabavi raises an interesting point about the need to control borders. To my knowledge every single WTO member does control their borders in that way. The partial exception is the European Union that has relaxed controls between its members. The UK specifically voted to leave the EU to "regain control" of its borders.

    I don't see how blame gets placed on the EU for its concerns about the Irish border. More interestingly I don't see the measures that could make the border effectively disappear when we have decided to separate from the other. I am happy to be informed on those measures. It doesn't seem our government is making much headway on its so called "creative solutions" either.

    Interestingly, the same argument was made by independence supporters about Scotland. Independence wouldn't create a border.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,793

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    There I was about to declare that it was a Terrrrrible Night for the Conservatives, and then I saw this result. At least we held the seat.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TGOHF said:

    Control is the ability to choose.

    What "choice" do we have under WTO rules?

    Take your time...
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,793
    PeterC said:

    DavidL said:

    The border issue may be less relevant next time there's a Scottish IndyRef (*if* there's a next time). However, the currency issue will as relevant and the oil-running-out issue will be even more relevant.

    But to get another referendum, there needs to be a pro-SIndyRef2 majority in Holyrood, which probably won't now come about until the SNP have lost power, Someone has replaced them as the Scottish government and then have themselves lost power. We're talking maybe 15 years down the line.

    One's almost tempted to say a generation.
    Is the alternative to the SNP at Holyrooda Unionist grand coalistion?
    Except SLAB are not the German Social Democrats, and I can't see them rolling over to have their tummies tickled by Ruthie.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2018
    FF43 said:

    Richard Nabavi raises an interesting point about the need to control borders. To my knowledge every single WTO member does control their borders in that way. The partial exception is the European Union that has relaxed controls between its members. The UK specifically voted to leave the EU to "regain control" of its borders.
    [snip].

    It depends what you mean by 'control borders'. Even in the very unlikely scenario that we do fall back on to WTO Most Favoured Nation (i.e. least favoured nation) rules, we'll still have the Common Travel Area in place, so there will be no need for anyone to show a passport. If customs controls are required, they will apply (exactly as they do now for booze'n'fags) only to commercial traffic. Even in the extreme case where for some bizarre reason it is felt necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely, the 'border control' can be a road sign saying 'To make a customs declaration, follow the blue signs', leading to a lorry park somewhere, and companies making regular trips can be registered for self-certification. It is baffling that anyone thinks this is a problem.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    There I was about to declare that it was a Terrrrrible Night for the Conservatives, and then I saw this result. At least we held the seat.
    This is a ward where Labour polled 80% in 2011 and 78% in 2007.

    http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/ward/6869/
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Control is the ability to choose.

    What "choice" do we have under WTO rules?

    Take your time...
    Chopping onions Scott ?
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    There I was about to declare that it was a Terrrrrible Night for the Conservatives, and then I saw this result. At least we held the seat.
    The big factor is the continuing collapse of UKIP. The Conservatives aren't benefiting from it as much as they might once have expected. The Lib Dems can do very well in places where they already have a beachhead. They were somewhat hollowed out so there aren't so many of those beachheads.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    HHemmelig said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
    Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,040
    AndyJS said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    There I was about to declare that it was a Terrrrrible Night for the Conservatives, and then I saw this result. At least we held the seat.
    This is a ward where Labour polled 80% in 2011 and 78% in 2007.

    http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/ward/6869/
    Looks like the Tories have swallowed the kipper vote whole there.
  • Options
    PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,274

    PeterC said:

    DavidL said:

    The border issue may be less relevant next time there's a Scottish IndyRef (*if* there's a next time). However, the currency issue will as relevant and the oil-running-out issue will be even more relevant.

    But to get another referendum, there needs to be a pro-SIndyRef2 majority in Holyrood, which probably won't now come about until the SNP have lost power, Someone has replaced them as the Scottish government and then have themselves lost power. We're talking maybe 15 years down the line.

    One's almost tempted to say a generation.
    Is the alternative to the SNP at Holyrooda Unionist grand coalistion?
    Except SLAB are not the German Social Democrats, and I can't see them rolling over to have their tummies tickled by Ruthie.
    So .. never ending SNP minority government?
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852

    FF43 said:

    Richard Nabavi raises an interesting point about the need to control borders. To my knowledge every single WTO member does control their borders in that way. The partial exception is the European Union that has relaxed controls between its members. The UK specifically voted to leave the EU to "regain control" of its borders.
    [snip].

    It depends what you mean by 'control borders'. Even in the very unlikely scenario that we do fall back on to WTO Most Favoured Nation (i.e. least favoured nation) rules, we'll still have the Common Travel Area in place, so there will be no need for anyone to show a passport. If customs controls are required, they will apply (exactly as they do now for booze'n'fags) only to commercial traffic. Even in the extreme case where for some bizarre reason it is felt necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely, the 'border control' can be a road sign saying 'To make a customs declaration, follow the blue signs', leading to a lorry park somewhere, and companies making regular trips can be registered for self-certification. It is baffling that anyone thinks this is a problem.
    OK. Uncontrolled borders aren't quite as uncontrolled as I thought you meant. But "bizarre reason it is felt necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely" - my observation was that every one of the 160 plus WTO member states "bizarrely" feels it necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely. I am not opposed to technical solutions but I would like to know what they are as no-one has found them yet.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,793
    Sean_F said:

    HHemmelig said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
    Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
    In Pontefract, all of the brownfield ex-colliery sites are being covered in new-build houses aimed squarely at those once described as 'Mondeo Man'. If this is typical, then the Toryfication of ex-mining towns with city overspill is to be expected.
  • Options
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Richard Nabavi raises an interesting point about the need to control borders. To my knowledge every single WTO member does control their borders in that way. The partial exception is the European Union that has relaxed controls between its members. The UK specifically voted to leave the EU to "regain control" of its borders.
    [snip].

    It depends what you mean by 'control borders'. Even in the very unlikely scenario that we do fall back on to WTO Most Favoured Nation (i.e. least favoured nation) rules, we'll still have the Common Travel Area in place, so there will be no need for anyone to show a passport. If customs controls are required, they will apply (exactly as they do now for booze'n'fags) only to commercial traffic. Even in the extreme case where for some bizarre reason it is felt necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely, the 'border control' can be a road sign saying 'To make a customs declaration, follow the blue signs', leading to a lorry park somewhere, and companies making regular trips can be registered for self-certification. It is baffling that anyone thinks this is a problem.
    OK. Uncontrolled borders aren't quite as uncontrolled as I thought you meant. But "bizarre reason it is felt necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely" - my observation was that every one of the 160 plus WTO member states "bizarrely" feels it necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely. I am not opposed to technical solutions but I would like to know what they are as no-one has found them yet.
    Our relationship under an FTA would be similar to the Canadian/US border, or hopefully even more seamless. They have a 'trusted trader' arrangement used especially by car manufacturers (there is an integrated Canada/US car manufacturing supply chain). The Irish border is far less of an issue, since it's between two tiny parts of the EU and UK economies, and most of the trade is local anyway. There is literally no way it could be used for large-scale smuggling into the EU as a whole without it being completely obvious.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    HHemmelig said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
    Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
    The swing is more pronounced in the Notts area coalfield than Yorkshire though. Look at the seats the Tories have in that part of the world, Sherwood, Mansfield, NE Derbyshire etc. It's UDM country so it's always been more rightwing than other coalfields. Bassetlaw seems like the outlier, but John Mann isn't exactly a standard Labour MP i suppose.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,003
    FF43 said:

    Richard Nabavi raises an interesting point about the need to control borders. To my knowledge every single WTO member does control their borders in that way. The partial exception is the European Union that has relaxed controls between its members. The UK specifically voted to leave the EU to "regain control" of its borders.

    I don't see how blame gets placed on the EU for its concerns about the Irish border. More interestingly I don't see the measures that could make the border effectively disappear when we have decided to separate from the other. I am happy to be informed on those measures. It doesn't seem our government is making much headway on its so called "creative solutions" either.

    Interestingly, the same argument was made by independence supporters about Scotland. Independence wouldn't create a border.

    Brexiters want Schrodingers border.

    The same border needs to apply as to the rest of the EU, and as Customs Union has been discarded hard border it is. This would need to include agriculture if we are to have innovative regulations to support our organic carrot industry.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    HHemmelig said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
    Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
    I think that statement is far too broad brush. The pattern is regional and patchy. There are plenty of English mining seats where the Tories are still seen as the antichrist. I doubt we are going to see Tory MPs any time soon in the likes of Easington, Barnsley East/Central or Doncaster North/Central.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    There I was about to declare that it was a Terrrrrible Night for the Conservatives, and then I saw this result. At least we held the seat.
    A chunk of the terrrrrrible night was down to the former Tory councillor in Devon being sent to prison for trying to murder his wife with a mallet (polo or croquet wasn't specified). All very Midsummer Murders - and not the best circumstances for the Tories to get the vote out to replace him.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,187
    edited February 2018
    HHemmelig said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump the 3rd worst President of the modern ers says a new US poll after Nixon and LBJ.

    Obama is the 3rd best after Reagan and JFK

    http://www.newsweek.com/trump-obama-worst-best-poll-808238?amp=1&__twitter_impression=true

    It speaks volumes about what a fucked up country the US has become that LBJ's great reforms on civil rights and on building a small safety net for the poor/elderly put him more beyond the pale than Trump.
    I agree - there's no way that LBJ was anywhere near as bad a president as Trump - but Vietnam ended his presidency, and will forever colour his legacy. It also derailed the US economy, lost the Democrats control of government ...to Nixon, and as a result effectively neutered the Great Society reforms.

    (I'd rate LBJ 5.0: 50% brilliant; 50% awful.)
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Richard Nabavi raises an interesting point about the need to control borders. To my knowledge every single WTO member does control their borders in that way. The partial exception is the European Union that has relaxed controls between its members. The UK specifically voted to leave the EU to "regain control" of its borders.
    [snip].

    It depends what you mean by 'control borders'. Even in the very unlikely scenario that we do fall back on to WTO Most Favoured Nation (i.e. least favoured nation) rules, we'll still have the Common Travel Area in place, so there will be no need for anyone to show a passport. If customs controls are required, they will apply (exactly as they do now for booze'n'fags) only to commercial traffic. Even in the extreme case where for some bizarre reason it is felt necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely, the 'border control' can be a road sign saying 'To make a customs declaration, follow the blue signs', leading to a lorry park somewhere, and companies making regular trips can be registered for self-certification. It is baffling that anyone thinks this is a problem.
    OK. Uncontrolled borders aren't quite as uncontrolled as I thought you meant. But "bizarre reason it is felt necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely" - my observation was that every one of the 160 plus WTO member states "bizarrely" feels it necessary to physically inspect consignments routinely. I am not opposed to technical solutions but I would like to know what they are as no-one has found them yet.
    Our relationship under an FTA would be similar to the Canadian/US border, or hopefully even more seamless. They have a 'trusted trader' arrangement used especially by car manufacturers (there is an integrated Canada/US car manufacturing supply chain). The Irish border is far less of an issue, since it's between two tiny parts of the EU and UK economies, and most of the trade is local anyway. There is literally no way it could be used for large-scale smuggling into the EU as a whole without it being completely obvious.
    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633



    There is literally no way it could be used for large-scale smuggling into the EU as a whole without it being completely obvious.

    Quite.

    All smuggling will continue to be for local purposes :)

  • Options

    Sean_F said:

    HHemmelig said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
    Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
    The swing is more pronounced in the Notts area coalfield than Yorkshire though. Look at the seats the Tories have in that part of the world, Sherwood, Mansfield, NE Derbyshire etc. It's UDM country so it's always been more rightwing than other coalfields. Bassetlaw seems like the outlier, but John Mann isn't exactly a standard Labour MP i suppose.
    Much of Bassetlaw looks to Doncaster rather than Notts so is essentially an unofficial part of Yorkshire.

    NE Derbyshire certainly was not right wing UDM country. I can hear my uncle turning in his grave as you speak. And certainly don't say that to Dennis Skinner.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2018
    Good result for Labour in Doncaster: they've held the seat with 75.4% against the Independent with 24.6%. Turnout was 17%.

    http://www.doncaster.gov.uk/services/the-council-democracy/armthorpe-by-election-15-february-2018
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    Sean_F said:

    HHemmelig said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
    Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
    How long before Wales follows suit?
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2018
    edit
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2018
    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
  • Options
    HHemmeligHHemmelig Posts: 617
    edited February 2018

    Sean_F said:

    HHemmelig said:

    Labour HOLD Grassmoor (North East Derbyshire)

    Labour 459
    Con 368
    Lib Dem 111

    Big swing to Tories

    Lab new Parliamentary candidate Chris Peace has an uphill task regaining NE Derbyshire. Lee Rowley will be strong favourite (fracking could alter that though)

    My great aunt was Labour mayor of NE Derbyshire back in the 80s, I imagined her doing somersaults in her grave when the Tories gained it last June, and she would have had another turn yesterday to see such a result in Grassmoor.

    NE Derbyshire and seats like it are very used to the severe pollution and subsidence resulting from coal mining and opencasting yet still protested when the pits closed. It is in some ways ironic that they should protest rather than welcome fracking. Perhaps it reflects how far back the mining history of the area now is (NE Derbyshire's last deep coal mine closed in 1988) and how much it has filled up with Tory-voting commuter types.
    Most English ex-mining seats have shifted very heavily towards the Conservatives.
    How long before Wales follows suit?
    I think it has to some degree, though just as in England it is a patchy trend. There were coal mines in Gower, Vale of Clwyd and Brecon & Radnor for example.

    Note that area with the most remaining coalmining in the UK is Ayrshire, which I think comes under a Tory seat now.
  • Options
    PeterC said:

    DavidL said:

    The border issue may be less relevant next time there's a Scottish IndyRef (*if* there's a next time). However, the currency issue will as relevant and the oil-running-out issue will be even more relevant.

    But to get another referendum, there needs to be a pro-SIndyRef2 majority in Holyrood, which probably won't now come about until the SNP have lost power, Someone has replaced them as the Scottish government and then have themselves lost power. We're talking maybe 15 years down the line.

    One's almost tempted to say a generation.
    Is the alternative to the SNP at Holyrooda Unionist grand coalistion?
    Difficult to say. It was easy enough for Con to back SNP on a vote-by-vote basis when the SNP were new in office but it's a different matter for Con/Lab/LD to do so when they're tired and losing seats. But as with the german parliament, you could end up with a situation where there's a blocking majority to almost any realistic combination.

    If, say, the result (in %age terms) was

    SNP 35
    Con 26
    Lab 24
    Grn 8
    LD 7

    How do you form anything out of that mess?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,313

    Our relationship under an FTA would be similar to the Canadian/US border, or hopefully even more seamless.

    The Nabavi plan for crossing the Irish border in a commercial truck:

    https://getawaytips.azcentral.com/how-do-i-cross-the-canadian-border-with-commercial-trucks-12370734.html

    Enroll into the FAST program if you have yet to do so. All drivers anticipating routes into Canada or Mexico should enroll in this program to expedite border crossings for pre-authorized shipments. You will need to fill out an application and turn it in at a FAST center. For more information and an application, visit the Department of Homeland Securities CBP website.

    Review all paperwork at least two hours ahead of arriving at the border. You should contact your Customs broker while reviewing your paperwork and send him the paperwork at that time. This can help speed things up when you get to the border. Make sure your paperwork is in order and note whether your shipment will require an inspection from Customs. Make sure you meet truck weight standards for entering Canada, at the location where you are seeking entrance, before your arrival.

    Go to the “Primary Inspection” lane upon arrival at the border. Make sure you have two forms of identification--preferably your passport and your commercial driver’s license. Do not carry any type of weapon in the vehicle, including something as simple as pepper spray. Any weapon is illegal in Canada, and a firearm could land you detained and in prison. If everything is in order, the immigration official will likely grant you entrance.

    Proceed to the secondary lane labeled “Secondary Inspection” if requested by the immigration official. This usually happens if your paperwork is not in order or if your shipment requires a Customs inspection. Simple follow the signs thereafter that read “Truck Inspection.” Once you pass your inspection and satisfy the Customs broker, you can proceed into Canada.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,852
    edited February 2018

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs are importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. Because of the sensitivity around the border other vehicles won't be checked unless the customs officers have specific information. Smugglers will use those vehicles, probably including vans -- a plumber might be visiting his mum or a client 5 miles away across the border ditch. The "bordering on bonkers" concerns are, as I say, the reason why every single WTO member does control its borders.
  • Options
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
    To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
    The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
    Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
    Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552
    edited February 2018

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    You are having a momentary lapse of logic informed perhaps by only a vague understanding of the past 50-odd years of life on the island of Ireland.

    To repeat a post of some moons ago:

    Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other

    Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity

    Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate

    Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s

    1970s = Troubles.

    Now, you may say that it's all low grade stuff (booze 'n' fags) but the more opportunities there are to make money, the more they will be exploited.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,313

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
    To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
    The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
    Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
    Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
    “Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    I'd rule out bonkers..
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.

    Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.

    Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
    You're missing the point of my article. If a solution is found for dealing with Northern Ireland to the satisfaction of all, that same solution will work for Scotland too.
    More simply if Ireland is seen as a relative success after Brexit, people in Scotland will say, we can do the same. The issues hypothetically facing a Scotland considering independence are the same as those actually facing Ireland right now.
    To be clear, the example for Scotland is Southern Ireland, not Northern Ireland.
    The Republic of Ireland uses the Euro as its currency. What currency will an independent Scotland use?
    Ultimately the euro. Scotland would be in the unique position of applying for EU membership without having an established currency, so it's unclear whether it would go straight to the euro or run an interim Scottish currency first.
    Well that's a big change on what the SNP proposed in 2014. Will be interesting to see them try to sell the benefits of using the Euro rather than Sterling.
    “Join the Euro and achieve 7.3% growth like Ireland”
    I would be in favour of the SNP putting joining the Euro in their next manifesto.
  • Options
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs are importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. Because of the sensitivity around the border other vehicles won't be checked unless the customs officers have specific information. Smugglers will use those vehicles, probably including vans -- a plumber might be visiting his mum or a client 5 miles away across the border ditch. The "bordering on bonkers" concerns are, as I say, the reason why every single WTO member does control its borders.
    Except already today not all non-EU imports get inspected so why would all lorries be physically inspected in the future?
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs are importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. Because of the sensitivity around the border other vehicles won't be checked unless the customs officers have specific information. Smugglers will use those vehicles, probably including vans -- a plumber might be visiting his mum or a client 5 miles away across the border ditch. The "bordering on bonkers" concerns are, as I say, the reason why every single WTO member does control its borders.
    Do you know how many road crossing points there are on the border to the nearest 100 ?

    Clue - not a dozen.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited February 2018
    This kind of false advertising/low-level corporate fraud is becoming commonplace;

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/feb/15/travelodge-book-cancel-compensation

    Where is the regulation?
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    You are having a momentary lapse of logic informed perhaps by only a vague understanding of the past 50-odd years of life on the island of Ireland.

    To repeat a post of some moons ago:

    Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other

    Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity

    Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate

    Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s

    1970s = Troubles.

    Now, you may say that it's all low grade stuff (booze 'n' fags) but the more opportunities there are to make money, the more they will be exploited.
    You're having a momentary lapse of forgetting that it is already the status quo today.

    We have different duties today let alone in the future.
  • Options

    Our relationship under an FTA would be similar to the Canadian/US border, or hopefully even more seamless.

    The Nabavi plan for crossing the Irish border in a commercial truck:

    https://getawaytips.azcentral.com/how-do-i-cross-the-canadian-border-with-commercial-trucks-12370734.html

    Enroll into the FAST program if you have yet to do so. All drivers anticipating routes into Canada or Mexico should enroll in this program to expedite border crossings for pre-authorized shipments. You will need to fill out an application and turn it in at a FAST center. For more information and an application, visit the Department of Homeland Securities CBP website.

    Review all paperwork at least two hours ahead of arriving at the border. You should contact your Customs broker while reviewing your paperwork and send him the paperwork at that time. This can help speed things up when you get to the border. Make sure your paperwork is in order and note whether your shipment will require an inspection from Customs. Make sure you meet truck weight standards for entering Canada, at the location where you are seeking entrance, before your arrival.

    Go to the “Primary Inspection” lane upon arrival at the border. Make sure you have two forms of identification--preferably your passport and your commercial driver’s license. Do not carry any type of weapon in the vehicle, including something as simple as pepper spray. Any weapon is illegal in Canada, and a firearm could land you detained and in prison. If everything is in order, the immigration official will likely grant you entrance.

    Proceed to the secondary lane labeled “Secondary Inspection” if requested by the immigration official. This usually happens if your paperwork is not in order or if your shipment requires a Customs inspection. Simple follow the signs thereafter that read “Truck Inspection.” Once you pass your inspection and satisfy the Customs broker, you can proceed into Canada.
    No, that's what you have to do if you're not a member of the Customs Self Assessment Program.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    You are having a momentary lapse of logic informed perhaps by only a vague understanding of the past 50-odd years of life on the island of Ireland.

    To repeat a post of some moons ago:

    Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other

    Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity

    Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate

    Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s

    1970s = Troubles.

    Now, you may say that it's all low grade stuff (booze 'n' fags) but the more opportunities there are to make money, the more they will be exploited.
    You're having a momentary lapse of forgetting that it is already the status quo today.

    We have different duties today let alone in the future.
    Absolutely. And we want to exacerbate the situation, right?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,313
    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs are importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    Anything that looks like a lorry will have to go through one of the dozen official customs points and will be checked. Because of the sensitivity around the border other vehicles won't be checked unless the customs officers have specific information. Smugglers will use those vehicles, probably including vans -- a plumber might be visiting his mum or a client 5 miles away across the border ditch. The "bordering on bonkers" concerns are, as I say, the reason why every single WTO member does control its borders.
    Do you know how many road crossing points there are on the border to the nearest 100 ?

    Clue - not a dozen.
    Which should make it obvious that it is unlike most borders, either politically or geographically.
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.

    It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
    You are having a momentary lapse of logic informed perhaps by only a vague understanding of the past 50-odd years of life on the island of Ireland.

    To repeat a post of some moons ago:

    Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other

    Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity

    Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate

    Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s

    1970s = Troubles.

    Now, you may say that it's all low grade stuff (booze 'n' fags) but the more opportunities there are to make money, the more they will be exploited.
    Eh? There's already a HUGE different tariff environment. The criminal gangs operate at the moment. The idea that they are going to switch from booze'n'fags, which are widely available, easy to sell and highly profitable, to car parts or US chickens in order to arbitrate on rules of origin is bonkers. In any case, why would there be any tariffs at all? Every man and his dog wants a Free Trade Agreement; there very probably won't be any tariffs.
This discussion has been closed.