There is nothing to stop our own standards and regulations matching those of the EU. That eliminates non-tariff barriers as an impediment to trade with the EU 27. Indeed we start off from that very position.
Membership of the Single Market? Because unless we formally commit to alignment and the EU formally accepts that commitment, "matching to standards" doesn't mean a thing. The NTBs stay.
This gets to the key of the negotiations. The number 1 priority of the EU is to keep us aligned. They want that agreement.
Looking at demographics and political history/vote share of the Lib Dems historically, I've got to say Buckingham looks a lot more like Witney than Richmond Park.
My "Bayesian prior" would be to assume they'd end up 45-55% Con, 25-35% Lib Dem, Labour 10-20% and see what specific information would cause me to adjust that expectation.
Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.
Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
Sure abolition of all tariffs. But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
Not necessarily. Read the history of the Victorian era. Britain started scrapping mercantilist tariffs in the 1820s, and by the 1850s had scrapped all tariffs. Unilaterally. This was followed by 40 years of the fastest growth this country has ever seen. And the growth was not from the Empire. By 1867, over 72% of British exports were outside the Empire.
+1 There's more than a hint of mercantalism in the phrase "unfair advantage".
O/T sitting outside our barn in the Yorkshire Dales enjoying the sunshine... a massive fight going on above for ownership of a house martin nest... one pair will get into the nest then the other pair tag-team to drag them out by the throat... quite vicious... unfortunately the pairs are indistinguishable so difficult to see which is winning
House martins here seem to have deserted us. There was a house a bit further down the street which had had nests for around 20 years. New owners decorated over the autumn and removed the nests and I don’t think any pairs have tried this year. May need to wait for the paint to get a bit older. On a positive note we saw swifts over the garden during the weekend.
I think they may have relocated here... six nests last year, though many chicks died during a cold wet early summer... the nestsmore than filling up this year, with overbooking by the look of it! they mark the wall where they nest with droppings in order to find the spot next summer... if the marks have been painted over they would struggle... its illegal to interfere with an active nest so important to knock them down over winter as your neighbour did... a right mess if they nest over the doorways so we hang mesh guards on the eaves at the vital spots...
I think this year the general breeding season may be late, due to the cold wet April. And it’s still cold here in the wind. Nothing in our blue-tit orientated box this year. It’s got a CCTV camera fitting and currently it’s even more boring than early Saturday evening TV.
Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.
Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
Sure abolition of all tariffs. But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
Not necessarily. Read the history of the Victorian era. Britain started scrapping mercantilist tariffs in the 1820s, and by the 1850s had scrapped all tariffs. Unilaterally. This was followed by 40 years of the fastest growth this country has ever seen. And the growth was not from the Empire. By 1867, over 72% of British exports were outside the Empire.
I think Ha-Joon Chang demolished this in Kicking away the Ladder. In any case - the relevance of the Victorian era to the modern economy is dubious.
Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.
Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
Sure abolition of all tariffs. But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
Not necessarily. Read the history of the Victorian era. Britain started scrapping mercantilist tariffs in the 1820s, and by the 1850s had scrapped all tariffs. Unilaterally. This was followed by 40 years of the fastest growth this country has ever seen. And the growth was not from the Empire. By 1867, over 72% of British exports were outside the Empire.
This growth was a function of industrialisation rather than our trade policy. How else can you explain the USA and Germany overhauling the U.K. economically by 1900 from behind high tariff walls?
The Irish border is the EU's problem. Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me. All UK consumers would benefit. To offer to impose the EU's Common External Tariff on all our imports in order to protect EU farming and industry at huge administrative expense is a mind-bogglingly stupid form of self-harm.
Indeed - once the Uk voter is exposed to tariff free shopping from the ROW we will never go back in the EU.
Fruit of the poisoned tree (or not, when its Remain doing it...)
A pro-remain campaign group has been fined £2,000 by the official elections watchdog for failing to declare donations totalling £30,000 in the EU referendum, the Press Association reports. The Electoral Commission said Best for Our Future Ltd failed to include a £20,000 donation from the GMB trade union and a further £10,000 from Unison in its spending return. The two unions were each fined £500 for failing to declare the donations while Unison received a further penalty of £1,000 for late payment of an invoice.
Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?
The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.
Bercow is not a fan of convention, what chance he defies it by not being elevated as a crossbench peer whenever he does step down?
What, and miss the chance to dress up? I think not.
I remember a great story about Lord Hailsham and his friend Neil Marten.
One day, when Neil was touring some of his constituents around the the Commons he bumped into Lord H who was processing in full regalia and surrounded by various flunkies.
Somewhat mischievously, Lord H threw his arm in the air and boomed "Neil" across the room.
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
Number of EU nationals working in Britain has fallen
Nearly two years after the Brexit vote, we can now see that the number of citizens from other European Union countries working in Britain has fallen.
The ONS reports that the total EU workforce in Britain fell by 28,000 over the last year. That’s the first annual decrease since January to March 2010.
Here’s the details from today’s labour market report:
There were 28.73 million UK nationals working in the UK, 417,000 more than for a year earlier. There were 2.29 million EU nationals working in the UK, 28,000 fewer than for a year earlier. There were 1.25 million non-EU nationals working in the UK, 20,000 more than for a year earlier. The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 years who were in work) was 81.9% for EU nationals, higher than that for UK nationals (75.6%) and higher than that for non-EU nationals (63.0%)
You know him much better than I - but I think it's a mistake to lump monarchy, NATO and trident together. He is never going to want nuclear weapons/Trident, but has accepted his party doesn't agree with him for the moment. I expect he will keep pushing to change policy. On the monarchy - I don't think he is going to push to change policy, I think it's a much lower-order priority.
Yes, I agree. I don't actually know many Labour Party members who really care about the monarchy one way or the other - they think it's an odd and unreasonably expensive quirk of British tradition and they decline to get into royal marriages and the like, but they accept that most people seem keen on it and it's really not a priority.
There are exceptions, some of them otherwise not very left-wing - a bit like people who aren't into animal welfare in general but get really worked up about hunting, they have republicanism as their token left-wing cause (abolishing public schools is an issue that sometimes plays a similar role).
Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?
The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.
Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
King Cole, and those representatives then presented the electorate with the referendum, (having voted beforehand to hold it, and afterwards to endorse the result).
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force
Then Ms Gina Miller obliged by taking the government to the High Court, which forced them to present and pass the Withdrawal from the European Union Bill which has got legal force
Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?
The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.
Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
That was fine in the day when the MP represented a tiny number of voters, or the owner of a pocket borough, parties hardly existed, and no one issued manifestos.
Universal suffrage, manifestos, and parties are now established parts of the political scene.
King Cole, and those representatives then presented the electorate with the referendum, (having voted beforehand to hold it, and afterwards to endorse the result).
That still doesn’t mean that after mature reflection, observation of the development of the situation and recognition of the difficulties to be faced, they cannot change their minds.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force
Then Ms Gina Miller obliged by taking the government to the High Court, which forced them to present and pass the Withdrawal from the European Union Bill which has got legal force
Ms Miller, Brexit Heroine.
Maybe so, but that was after the govt decided that an advisory referendum had legal force on (apparently) no basis other than it would keep the Tory party from splitting.
Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?
The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.
Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
That was fine in the day when the MP represented a tiny number of voters, or the owner of a pocket borough, parties hardly existed, and no one issued manifestos.
Universal suffrage, manifestos, and parties are now established parts of the political scene.
Manifestoes - Don't forget that Labour went to court to specifically disown theirs a few years back.
Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?
The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.
Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
That was fine in the day when the MP represented a tiny number of voters, or the owner of a pocket borough, parties hardly existed, and no one issued manifestos.
Universal suffrage, manifestos, and parties are now established parts of the political scene.
True but an MP is still not a delegate. They may have to defend their actions to their supporters, of course.
If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?
[As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].
Leaving the EU is easy. Leaving the EU in such a way that it avoids the worst of Project Fear (and be clear, the narrow Leave majority was won on the implicit promise that nothing we like would change) requires the UK to go from participation in EU decision-making to doing what we are told by an organisation that no longer represents us. The only real reason for the UK to leave the EU was to gain control and yet we give up our influence to end up withless overall from the relationship.
That contradiction makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.
You can fool some of the people all of the time... https://www.salon.com/2018/05/14/team-trump-plans-to-go-on-war-footing-to-fend-off-impeachment-it-could-backfire-big-time/ According to a new Economist/YouGov poll, 75 percent of Republicans now agree that the Mueller investigation is a "witch hunt." Only 13 percent of the GOP believe it's legitimate. An alarming 61 percent of Republicans and 25 percent of independents believe the FBI is framing Donald Trump. Only 17 percent of GOP voters disagree with that…
If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?
[As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].
Leaving the EU is easy. Leaving the EU in such a way that it avoids the worst of Project Fear (and be clear, the narrow Leave majority was won on the implicit promise that nothing we like would change) requires the UK to go from participation in EU decision-making to doing what we are told by an organisation that no longer represents us. The only real reason for the UK to leave the EU was to gain control and yet we give up our influence to get less out of the relationship.
That contradiction that makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.
The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.
(NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)
He's not calling for an invasion of Israel! just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.
He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.
Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.
It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
Number of EU nationals working in Britain has fallen
Nearly two years after the Brexit vote, we can now see that the number of citizens from other European Union countries working in Britain has fallen.
The ONS reports that the total EU workforce in Britain fell by 28,000 over the last year. That’s the first annual decrease since January to March 2010.
Here’s the details from today’s labour market report:
There were 28.73 million UK nationals working in the UK, 417,000 more than for a year earlier. There were 2.29 million EU nationals working in the UK, 28,000 fewer than for a year earlier. There were 1.25 million non-EU nationals working in the UK, 20,000 more than for a year earlier. The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 years who were in work) was 81.9% for EU nationals, higher than that for UK nationals (75.6%) and higher than that for non-EU nationals (63.0%)
If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?
[As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].
Leaving the EU is easy. Leaving the EU in such a way that it avoids the worst of Project Fear (and be clear, the narrow Leave majority was won on the implicit promise that nothing we like would change) requires the UK to go from participation in EU decision-making to doing what we are told by an organisation that no longer represents us. The only real reason for the UK to leave the EU was to gain control and yet we give up our influence to get less out of the relationship.
That contradiction that makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.
If avoiding practical dislocations is a true red line then there's only one way to do Brexit, and if that's the only way to do Brexit, almost nobody wants it.
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide." Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force
Then Ms Gina Miller obliged by taking the government to the High Court, which forced them to present and pass the Withdrawal from the European Union Bill which has got legal force
Ms Miller, Brexit Heroine.
Surely, (at the time) Ms Miller only wanted to ensure that the UK parliament took back control - so pro democracy?
Subsequently it seems she is not happy with the way they voted - so not so keen on democracy.
"Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide." Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."
Commenting on today’s productivity figures, ONS deputy chief economist Richard Heys said:
“Labour productivity fell by 0.5% in the first three months of the year, as a result of continued strength in employment growth combined with weaker output growth. Productivity can be volatile, and despite this quarterly fall the underlying picture is one of modest growth with productivity 1.0% higher than a year ago.”
Commenting on today’s labour market figures, senior ONS statistician Matt Hughes said:
"With employment up again in the three months to March, the rate has hit a new record, with unemployment remaining at its lowest rate since 1975.
“The growth in employment is still being driven by UK nationals, with a slight drop over the past year in the number of foreign workers. It’s important to remember, though, that this isn’t a measure of migration.
“Growth in total pay remains in line with inflation, meaning real earnings are flat on the year.”
"Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."
"Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide." Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."
"Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."
If Bercow is forced out this year I would not put it past him to go to the backbenches and cause maximum trouble for the Government. He's no respect for convention or proprietary.
Of course, he could then become the first MP to face recall, especially if more emerges on the bullying allegations.
You know him much better than I - but I think it's a mistake to lump monarchy, NATO and trident together. He is never going to want nuclear weapons/Trident, but has accepted his party doesn't agree with him for the moment. I expect he will keep pushing to change policy. On the monarchy - I don't think he is going to push to change policy, I think it's a much lower-order priority.
Yes, I agree. I don't actually know many Labour Party members who really care about the monarchy one way or the other - they think it's an odd and unreasonably expensive quirk of British tradition and they decline to get into royal marriages and the like, but they accept that most people seem keen on it and it's really not a priority.
There are exceptions, some of them otherwise not very left-wing - a bit like people who aren't into animal welfare in general but get really worked up about hunting, they have republicanism as their token left-wing cause (abolishing public schools is an issue that sometimes plays a similar role).
57% of Labour voters think the monarchy is good for Britain according to Yougov
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide." Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."
The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.
(NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)
He's not calling for an invasion of Israel! just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.
He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.
Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.
It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
But does Corbyn separate the 'Israeli government' from 'Jews' in his mind, in his statements and in his actions?
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide." Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."
Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.
Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
Sure abolition of all tariffs. But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
N.B. a leading proponent for the idea predicts that it would mostly eliminate UK manufacturing.
There is nothing to stop our own standards and regulations matching those of the EU. That eliminates non-tariff barriers as an impediment to trade with the EU 27. Indeed we start off from that very position.
If it's only the starting point and some of it will change, then it's still an impediment to trade, because you still need the infrastructure to handle the coming differences (customs etc), and investment decisions have to account for the possibility that you won't be able to get stuff across the border because standards diverge.
You can of course commit to follow whatever they do, but that's the exact opposite of taking back control.
The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.
(NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)
He's not calling for an invasion of Israel! just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.
He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.
Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.
It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
But does Corbyn separate the 'Israeli government' from 'Jews' in his mind, in his statements and in his actions?
Seems unlikely he would have spent Passover with the Israeli government
If avoiding practical dislocations is a true red line then there's only one way to do Brexit, and if that's the only way to do Brexit, almost nobody wants it.
You'll never live like gammon people. You'll never do whatever gammon people do. You'll never fail like gammon people. You'll never watch your life slide out of view.
Sing along with the gammon people Sing along and it might just get you through Laugh along with the gammon people
Laugh along even though they're laughing at you And the stupid things that you do Because you think that poor is cool.
Commenting on today’s productivity figures, ONS deputy chief economist Richard Heys said:
“Labour productivity fell by 0.5% in the first three months of the year, as a result of continued strength in employment growth combined with weaker output growth. Productivity can be volatile, and despite this quarterly fall the underlying picture is one of modest growth with productivity 1.0% higher than a year ago.”
Commenting on today’s labour market figures, senior ONS statistician Matt Hughes said:
"With employment up again in the three months to March, the rate has hit a new record, with unemployment remaining at its lowest rate since 1975.
“The growth in employment is still being driven by UK nationals, with a slight drop over the past year in the number of foreign workers. It’s important to remember, though, that this isn’t a measure of migration.
“Growth in total pay remains in line with inflation, meaning real earnings are flat on the year.”
The growth in employment (and wages) in the first quarter suggests that GDP numbers for that quarter will eventually be revised upwards.
Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.
I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide." Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."
Or Cameron left for gross negligence by not providing for the exit option in advance.
It's been two years since the referendum. How long exactly do you think Cameron should have spent on it?
Enough.
The original sin of Brexit was not including a negotiating position in the referendum. The official leave campaign should have been asked to provide a 1 page summary of what our aims and red lines would be, and the vote should have been on implementing that.
If Bercow is forced out this year I would not put it past him to go to the backbenches and cause maximum trouble for the Government. He's no respect for convention or proprietary.
Of course, he could then become the first MP to face recall, especially if more emerges on the bullying allegations.
If Bercow went to the backbenches he could finally speak out in parliament and elsewhere on behalf of his constituents about HS2, East/West Rail, the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway and associated big City plans, the Incinerator and all the other major disruptions taking place in his constituency.
If Bercow is forced out this year I would not put it past him to go to the backbenches and cause maximum trouble for the Government. He's no respect for convention or proprietary.
Of course, he could then become the first MP to face recall, especially if more emerges on the bullying allegations.
Is there an interesting, and possibly unanswerable, constitutional question if that happens? He avoided facing a GE vote because he was the Speaker at the time. If he returns to the backbench rather than the standard resigns his seat to go to Lords - what is the position?
"Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."
The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.
(NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)
He's not calling for an invasion of Israel! just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.
He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.
Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.
It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
But does Corbyn separate the 'Israeli government' from 'Jews' in his mind, in his statements and in his actions?
It's why thought crime is so difficult. I would tend to see "anti-Semitic" as being dependent on motive (why you say what you do) rather than an objective statement.
"Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."
I think the Lib Dems could push 30% or so in a Buckingham by-election. They'll definitely get more votes there than Lewisham.
Buckingham is not that different a seat to the host of wealthy Southern market towns the LibDems used to hold: Eastleigh, Bath, Winchester, etc.
And I think you can probably allocate all the "Pro EU Conservative Party" votes to the LibDems in a by-election, and a reasonable portion of the (small) Labour vote.
My guess is that the LibDems could nab it on a good day. However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?
The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.
(NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)
He's not calling for an invasion of Israel! just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.
He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.
Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.
It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
I think that's right although he has spent so long criticising Israel, which is populated and run by Jews, that by this time it would be amazing if he hadn't come to believe that it is actually the Jews which are the problem.
Also, don’t forget that a couple of one-off factors like the cold winter weather, early Easter vacation and strikes probably distorted first quarter data.
I always love 'one off factors'. It's a way of pretending things that happen fairly regularly won't happen again EVER, so we can all discount this and pretend the 'underlying' results are much better than they are.
One off - cold winter? Happens about once every four quarters I reckon. Early Easter - happens probably once every three years. Strikes - Happen all the time.
Good for a laugh that. Economists deluding themselves again.
It comes close, but it doesn't have the information I'm looking for.
You can see how people voted by sex/class and age/class but not by political allegiance/class
The Ashcroft exit poll is probably closest but not exact.
Breaks down by class and political allegiance but not together. However based on the poll I would expect AB Tories may have voted Remain and C2 and DE Labour voters may have voted Leave despite Tory voters overall voting Leave and Labour voters overall voting Remain
I think the Lib Dems could push 30% or so in a Buckingham by-election. They'll definitely get more votes there than Lewisham.
Buckingham is not that different a seat to the host of wealthy Southern market towns the LibDems used to hold: Eastleigh, Bath, Winchester, etc.
And I think you can probably allocate all the "Pro EU Conservative Party" votes to the LibDems in a by-election, and a reasonable portion of the (small) Labour vote.
My guess is that the LibDems could nab it on a good day. However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?
The Tories held Buckingham comfortably in 1997 and 2001 before Bercow became Speaker and with the Tories ahead in most national polls I doubt the LDs have any real chance. It was also pretty evenly split in the EU referendum unlike Richmond Park which was over 70% Remain
I think the Lib Dems could push 30% or so in a Buckingham by-election. They'll definitely get more votes there than Lewisham.
Buckingham is not that different a seat to the host of wealthy Southern market towns the LibDems used to hold: Eastleigh, Bath, Winchester, etc.
And I think you can probably allocate all the "Pro EU Conservative Party" votes to the LibDems in a by-election, and a reasonable portion of the (small) Labour vote.
My guess is that the LibDems could nab it on a good day. However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?
The Tories held Buckingham comfortably in 1997 and 2001 before Bercow became Speaker and with the Tories ahead in most national polls I doubt the LDs have any real chance. It was also pretty evenly split in the EU referendum unlike Richmond Park which was over 70% Remain
In the old days, the LibDems would grab a seat like Winchester against the government, eight times out of ten. But as my comment implied, I wouldn't expect them to manage it this time around.
Sorry but I think the LDs have had it. Being a general NOTA, what are you rebelling against Party is fine and as we saw, such a theoretical position had a very strong attraction pre-2010.
Since then, not only have they had contact with reality, which didn't suit their supporters all that much, but they are positioning themselves as a single issue NOTA Party which doesn't really work.
Perhaps best would be to do a UKIP and turn into a single issue pressure group seeking to rejoin the EU. And who knows, in 20 years or so they may very well be successful.
@mods : you might want to know that PB currently is running those scam bitcoin adverts, with the fake Dragon's Den quotes. I know you probably have little influence over what ads google choose there, but might be worth looking at (especially since they're getting sued for the fake endorsements by Peter Jones).
Comments
My "Bayesian prior" would be to assume they'd end up 45-55% Con, 25-35% Lib Dem, Labour 10-20% and see what specific information would cause me to adjust that expectation.
There's more than a hint of mercantalism in the phrase "unfair advantage".
Nothing in our blue-tit orientated box this year. It’s got a CCTV camera fitting and currently it’s even more boring than early Saturday evening TV.
In any case - the relevance of the Victorian era to the modern economy is dubious.
You might find the following interesting: http://lvin.ru/documents/nye/Magnanimous_Albion_-_Free_Trade_and_British_National_Income_1841-1881.pdf
If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?
[As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].
A pro-remain campaign group has been fined £2,000 by the official elections watchdog for failing to declare donations totalling £30,000 in the EU referendum, the Press Association reports. The Electoral Commission said Best for Our Future Ltd failed to include a £20,000 donation from the GMB trade union and a further £10,000 from Unison in its spending return. The two unions were each fined £500 for failing to declare the donations while Unison received a further penalty of £1,000 for late payment of an invoice.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/may/15/brexit-may-accused-of-subverting-devolution-as-msps-prepare-to-refuse-consent-to-eu-withdrawal-bill-politics-live
MPs voted the way the did (and, for many, against their gut feelings) because of the referendum and party whips.
It is democracy Jim, but not as we know it
The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.
One day, when Neil was touring some of his constituents around the the Commons he bumped into Lord H who was processing in full regalia and surrounded by various flunkies.
Somewhat mischievously, Lord H threw his arm in the air and boomed "Neil" across the room.
And they all did.
It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
Nearly two years after the Brexit vote, we can now see that the number of citizens from other European Union countries working in Britain has fallen.
The ONS reports that the total EU workforce in Britain fell by 28,000 over the last year. That’s the first annual decrease since January to March 2010.
Here’s the details from today’s labour market report:
There were 28.73 million UK nationals working in the UK, 417,000 more than for a year earlier.
There were 2.29 million EU nationals working in the UK, 28,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
There were 1.25 million non-EU nationals working in the UK, 20,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 years who were in work) was 81.9% for EU nationals, higher than that for UK nationals (75.6%) and higher than that for non-EU nationals (63.0%)
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live
Gordon 'British jobs for British Workers' Brown will be pleased
There are exceptions, some of them otherwise not very left-wing - a bit like people who aren't into animal welfare in general but get really worked up about hunting, they have republicanism as their token left-wing cause (abolishing public schools is an issue that sometimes plays a similar role).
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/996337160012861440
https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/996339075387969536
Unite and Momentum backing rival candidates for Labour's Lewisham East nomination
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/may/15/brexit-may-accused-of-subverting-devolution-as-msps-prepare-to-refuse-consent-to-eu-withdrawal-bill-politics-live
Ms Miller, Brexit Heroine.
Universal suffrage, manifestos, and parties are now established parts of the political scene.
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/05/14/tunisia-launches-500-mw-solar-tender/
Through the new tender, the Tunisian government hopes to build a 200 MW solar plant in the province of Tatouine....
That contradiction makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.
https://www.salon.com/2018/05/14/team-trump-plans-to-go-on-war-footing-to-fend-off-impeachment-it-could-backfire-big-time/
According to a new Economist/YouGov poll, 75 percent of Republicans now agree that the Mueller investigation is a "witch hunt." Only 13 percent of the GOP believe it's legitimate. An alarming 61 percent of Republicans and 25 percent of independents believe the FBI is framing Donald Trump. Only 17 percent of GOP voters disagree with that…
He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.
Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.
It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
More than 10% of workers in this country are not UK nationals (= foreigners).
"This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide." Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
Surely, (at the time) Ms Miller only wanted to ensure that the UK parliament took back control - so pro democracy?
Subsequently it seems she is not happy with the way they voted - so not so keen on democracy.
*Per gallon*
https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/comment/1386593/#Comment_1386593
Commenting on today’s productivity figures, ONS deputy chief economist Richard Heys said:
“Labour productivity fell by 0.5% in the first three months of the year, as a result of continued strength in employment growth combined with weaker output growth. Productivity can be volatile, and despite this quarterly fall the underlying picture is one of modest growth with productivity 1.0% higher than a year ago.”
Commenting on today’s labour market figures, senior ONS statistician Matt Hughes said:
"With employment up again in the three months to March, the rate has hit a new record, with unemployment remaining at its lowest rate since 1975.
“The growth in employment is still being driven by UK nationals, with a slight drop over the past year in the number of foreign workers. It’s important to remember, though, that this isn’t a measure of migration.
“Growth in total pay remains in line with inflation, meaning real earnings are flat on the year.”
Or Cameron left for gross negligence by not providing for the exit option in advance.
Of course, he could then become the first MP to face recall, especially if more emerges on the bullying allegations.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/09/08/monarchy-here-stay/
You can of course commit to follow whatever they do, but that's the exact opposite of taking back control.
You'll never live like gammon people.
You'll never do whatever gammon people do.
You'll never fail like gammon people.
You'll never watch your life slide out of view.
Sing along with the gammon people
Sing along and it might just get you through
Laugh along with the gammon people
Laugh along even though they're laughing at you
And the stupid things that you do
Because you think that poor is cool.
ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum
King Cole, it would be legal for the Commons to do that. And cause immense political damage and distrust.
You can see how people voted by sex/class and age/class but not by political allegiance/class
https://twitter.com/marwood_lennox/status/956998702979276800
Another example of polls underestimating the nationalist choice.
Which of course means that when I first arrived in the UK, I couldn't speak a word of English
Yes but everything in the US is further apart, so per journey it costs the same.
And I think you can probably allocate all the "Pro EU Conservative Party" votes to the LibDems in a by-election, and a reasonable portion of the (small) Labour vote.
My guess is that the LibDems could nab it on a good day. However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_Legislative_Assembly_election,_2016
One off - cold winter? Happens about once every four quarters I reckon.
Early Easter - happens probably once every three years.
Strikes - Happen all the time.
Good for a laugh that. Economists deluding themselves again.
Breaks down by class and political allegiance but not together. However based on the poll I would expect AB Tories may have voted Remain and C2 and DE Labour voters may have voted Leave despite Tory voters overall voting Leave and Labour voters overall voting Remain
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
Since then, not only have they had contact with reality, which didn't suit their supporters all that much, but they are positioning themselves as a single issue NOTA Party which doesn't really work.
Perhaps best would be to do a UKIP and turn into a single issue pressure group seeking to rejoin the EU. And who knows, in 20 years or so they may very well be successful.