Monarchism is essentially a form of Socialism! "What are you on about, Sunil?" I hear you cry!
Well, consider:
1) Monarchs have a job for life, which is quintessentially Socialist!
2) The hereditary principle, a feature of Socialist dynasties around the world, such as the Kennedys in the USA, Nehru-Gandhis in India, and the Kims in North Korea!
3) Pomp and circumstance - Trooping the Colour is after all merely a toned down version of all those North Korean and (former) Soviet military parades!
So, my fellow PBers, I put it to you that Monarchism = Socialism!
No, monarchism is the oldest essence of conservatism, even more than free trade and capitalism which was originally more a liberal than a conservative concept. Indeed the Tory Party emerged from being more loyal to the crown and the future James IInd than the Whigs opposing in 1678 the Whigs Exclusion Bill aimed at excluding James Duke of York from the throne.Hence also the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics began by overthrowing the Romanovs.
Plenty of conservative dynasties too, see the Bushes, the Churchills, the Gummers etc
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The wedding is not getting public funding, only the security which would be the same for any big event such as the wedding of the son or daughter or grandchild of a president
I would tend to agree with @MorrisDancer about the word mansplaining. Not only is it a contrived neologism, I don't know why we need yet another gendered term...
I think it fair enough, given how many insulting gendered terms women have been on the receiving end of in the past. The annoyance it creates is probably a feature rather than a bug...
So it’s basically like positive discrimination? Giving them a taste of their own medicine...
Are you mansplaining mansplaining?
No need to patronise his patronising.
Loved the bit in Star Trek II (1982) where Khan (Ricardo Montalban) says, on chasing the USS Enterprise into the Mutara Nebula, when his henchman says "If they go in there, we'll lose them!" and Khan goes
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
IMO it's annoying that broadcasters like Channel 4 News and the BBC, who are usually relatively sceptical about traditional institutions like the monarchy, seem to suddenly adopt a obsessive interest in the royal family whenever a wedding is about to take place. You would expect the Daily Mail and Express to be like that but not the BBC.
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The point is Nick, few of us on here are interested. We just don’t feel the need to be churlish about it like Ms Dent Coad.
They seem like a nice couple, and well suited. Good luck to them. My slim prayer is that the papers, particularly the Mail, gives Meghan a break. If I don’t know better I’d say its antipathy toward her was because she is brown.
Monarchism is essentially a form of Socialism! "What are you on about, Sunil?" I hear you cry!
Well, consider:
1) Monarchs have a job for life, which is quintessentially Socialist!
2) The hereditary principle, a feature of Socialist dynasties around the world, such as the Kennedys in the USA, Nehru-Gandhis in India, and the Kims in North Korea!
3) Pomp and circumstance - Trooping the Colour is after all merely a toned down version of all those North Korean and (former) Soviet military parades!
So, my fellow PBers, I put it to you that Monarchism = Socialism!
No, monarchism is the oldest essence of conservatism, even more than free trade and capitalism which was originally more a liberal than a conservative concept. Indeed the Tory Party emerged from being more loyal to the crown and the future James IInd than the Whigs opposing in 1678 the Whigs Exclusion Bill aimed at excluding James Duke of York from the throne.Hence also the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics began by overthrowing the Romanovs.
Plenty of conservative dynasties too, see the Bushes, the Churchills, the Gummers etc
The other essence of conservatism is unionism, the integrity and protection of the nation state, and its domestic equivalent - the family.
May is a conservative. She’s one of the few true conservatives in the Conservatives.
Monarchism is essentially a form of Socialism! "What are you on about, Sunil?" I hear you cry!
Well, consider:
1) Monarchs have a job for life, which is quintessentially Socialist!
2) The hereditary principle, a feature of Socialist dynasties around the world, such as the Kennedys in the USA, Nehru-Gandhis in India, and the Kims in North Korea!
3) Pomp and circumstance - Trooping the Colour is after all merely a toned down version of all those North Korean and (former) Soviet military parades!
So, my fellow PBers, I put it to you that Monarchism = Socialism!
No, monarchism is the oldest essence of conservatism, even more than free trade and capitalism which was originally more a liberal than a conservative concept. Indeed the Tory Party emerged from being more loyal to the crown and the future James IInd than the Whigs opposing in 1678 the Whigs Exclusion Bill aimed at excluding James Duke of York from the throne.Hence also the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics began by overthrowing the Romanovs.
Plenty of conservative dynasties too, see the Bushes, the Churchills, the Gummers etc
The other essence of conservatism is unionism, the integrity and protection of the nation state, and its domestic equivalent - the family.
May is a conservative. She’s one of the few true conservatives in the Conservatives.
A modest tweak to the Lords would be to make appointments
a) regularly scheduled with the same number appointed each time.
b) proportional to the results of the last election with perhaps a 40% allowance for cross benchers.
An even better tweak would be to remove it appointments from the patronage of the party leaders and given over to an impartial committee, albeit seeking the approval of the relevant party leader (basically the reverse of what we have at present).
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The point is Nick, few of us on here are interested. We just don’t feel the need to be churlish about it like Ms Dent Coad.
They seem like a nice couple, and well suited. Good luck to them. My slim prayer is that the papers, particularly the Mail, gives Meghan a break. If I don’t know better I’d say its antipathy toward her was because she is brown.
Agree on your attitude to the wedding. I am a monarchist in so far as I think the country is better served by a monarchy than by an elected Head of State. But that is as far as it goes. I have absolutely no interest in what they get up top as long as it doesn't bring the institution into disrepute. I won't be watching the wedding nor really taking any interest in it at all but just like any other married couple I wish them all the best for the future.
Oh and I did think that Charles (of whom I am not a great fan) stepping in in place of the father of the bride was a very nice touch.
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The point is Nick, few of us on here are interested. We just don’t feel the need to be churlish about it like Ms Dent Coad.
They seem like a nice couple, and well suited. Good luck to them. My slim prayer is that the papers, particularly the Mail, gives Meghan a break. If I don’t know better I’d say its antipathy toward her was because she is brown.
Agree on your attitude to the wedding. I am a monarchist in so far as I think the country is better served by a monarchy than by an elected Head of State. But that is as far as it goes. I have absolutely no interest in what they get up top as long as it doesn't bring the institution into disrepute. I won't be watching the wedding nor really taking any interest in it at all but just like any other married couple I wish them all the best for the future.
Oh and I did think that Charles (of whom I am not a great fan) stepping in in place of the father of the bride was a very nice touch.
I agree, on all counts.
Since I don't have a TV, it's easy for me to give all the festivities a miss, but I'm very pleased to see all the people who do enjoy it, having the opportunity to celebrate along with the happy couple & their families.
A modest tweak to the Lords would be to make appointments
a) regularly scheduled with the same number appointed each time.
b) proportional to the results of the last election with perhaps a 40% allowance for cross benchers.
An even better tweak would be to remove it appointments from the patronage of the party leaders and given over to an impartial committee, albeit seeking the approval of the relevant party leader (basically the reverse of what we have at present).
I think I would be more radical.
Limit the number of Lords to say 300 or 400.
All life peerages but absolute maximum age of 80 then must retire.
All replacements by independent committee but with the aim to represent all walks of life. Generally candidates would be those who have achieved success in their chosen careers whether that is industry, charity, politics, trade unionism, business, science or the arts. Or community leaders etc.
Ban whipping in the Lords. Every vote must be a free vote.
A modest tweak to the Lords would be to make appointments
a) regularly scheduled with the same number appointed each time.
b) proportional to the results of the last election with perhaps a 40% allowance for cross benchers.
An even better tweak would be to remove it appointments from the patronage of the party leaders and given over to an impartial committee, albeit seeking the approval of the relevant party leader (basically the reverse of what we have at present).
I think I would be more radical.
Limit the number of Lords to say 300 or 400.
All life peerages but absolute maximum age of 80 then must retire.
All replacements by independent committee but with the aim to represent all walks of life. Generally candidates would be those who have achieved success in their chosen careers whether that is industry, charity, politics, trade unionism, business, science or the arts. Or community leaders etc.
Ban whipping in the Lords. Every vote must be a free vote.
I could go along with this, yes. Of course I’d also get rid of the remaining hereditaries.
A modest tweak to the Lords would be to make appointments
a) regularly scheduled with the same number appointed each time.
b) proportional to the results of the last election with perhaps a 40% allowance for cross benchers.
An even better tweak would be to remove it appointments from the patronage of the party leaders and given over to an impartial committee, albeit seeking the approval of the relevant party leader (basically the reverse of what we have at present).
I think I would be more radical.
Limit the number of Lords to say 300 or 400.
All life peerages but absolute maximum age of 80 then must retire.
All replacements by independent committee but with the aim to represent all walks of life. Generally candidates would be those who have achieved success in their chosen careers whether that is industry, charity, politics, trade unionism, business, science or the arts. Or community leaders etc.
Ban whipping in the Lords. Every vote must be a free vote.
I could go along with this, yes. Of course I’d also get rid of the remaining hereditaries.
Sorry should have made that clear. Yes. A completely appointed non political upper chamber.
A modest tweak to the Lords would be to make appointments
a) regularly scheduled with the same number appointed each time.
b) proportional to the results of the last election with perhaps a 40% allowance for cross benchers.
An even better tweak would be to remove it appointments from the patronage of the party leaders and given over to an impartial committee, albeit seeking the approval of the relevant party leader (basically the reverse of what we have at present).
I think I would be more radical.
Limit the number of Lords to say 300 or 400.
All life peerages but absolute maximum age of 80 then must retire.
All replacements by independent committee but with the aim to represent all walks of life. Generally candidates would be those who have achieved success in their chosen careers whether that is industry, charity, politics, trade unionism, business, science or the arts. Or community leaders etc.
Ban whipping in the Lords. Every vote must be a free vote.
I could go along with this, yes. Of course I’d also get rid of the remaining hereditaries.
Sorry should have made that clear. Yes. A completely appointed non political upper chamber.
The waiting is over. Theresa May has finally chosen a side on Brexit, nearly two years after the referendum. It has not — yet — been set out explicitly. Indeed Mrs May’s language at this week’s prime minister’s questions stressed compromise and balance on the subject. However her choice is increasingly clear.
Mrs May is signalling that she will prioritise protecting the union of the United Kingdom over the need for a full future unfettered free trade policy wherever necessary. Her Brexit will do nothing to imperil the already-fragile constitutional settlement in Northern Ireland. She is gambling that a majority in her party — the Conservative and Unionist Party — will make the same judgment.....
...5 “I can’t believe it’s not the single market” Theresa May will insist the UK is leaving the single market, and in strict legal terms she is right. Ministers — even in the Brexit sub committee — have not discussed how closely aligned the UK will be to the EU from 2021. However if a hard border with Northern Ireland is to be avoided, the backstop proposal also means the whole of the UK staying very close to the single market.
Although we do not have to be “in the single market”, the amount of variation will be tightly limited. This is likely to be another big area of disagreement for the cabinet and Brexit cabinet sub-committee. In truth, however, the cabinet has already signed up to a very high degree of alignment with the EU when they approved Mrs May’s Mansion House speech.
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
The waiting is over. Theresa May has finally chosen a side on Brexit, nearly two years after the referendum. It has not — yet — been set out explicitly. Indeed Mrs May’s language at this week’s prime minister’s questions stressed compromise and balance on the subject. However her choice is increasingly clear.
Mrs May is signalling that she will prioritise protecting the union of the United Kingdom over the need for a full future unfettered free trade policy wherever necessary. Her Brexit will do nothing to imperil the already-fragile constitutional settlement in Northern Ireland. She is gambling that a majority in her party — the Conservative and Unionist Party — will make the same judgment.....
...5 “I can’t believe it’s not the single market” Theresa May will insist the UK is leaving the single market, and in strict legal terms she is right. Ministers — even in the Brexit sub committee — have not discussed how closely aligned the UK will be to the EU from 2021. However if a hard border with Northern Ireland is to be avoided, the backstop proposal also means the whole of the UK staying very close to the single market.
Although we do not have to be “in the single market”, the amount of variation will be tightly limited. This is likely to be another big area of disagreement for the cabinet and Brexit cabinet sub-committee. In truth, however, the cabinet has already signed up to a very high degree of alignment with the EU when they approved Mrs May’s Mansion House speech.
The waiting is over. Theresa May has finally chosen a side on Brexit, nearly two years after the referendum. It has not — yet — been set out explicitly. Indeed Mrs May’s language at this week’s prime minister’s questions stressed compromise and balance on the subject. However her choice is increasingly clear.
Mrs May is signalling that she will prioritise protecting the union of the United Kingdom over the need for a full future unfettered free trade policy wherever necessary. Her Brexit will do nothing to imperil the already-fragile constitutional settlement in Northern Ireland. She is gambling that a majority in her party — the Conservative and Unionist Party — will make the same judgment.....
...5 “I can’t believe it’s not the single market” Theresa May will insist the UK is leaving the single market, and in strict legal terms she is right. Ministers — even in the Brexit sub committee — have not discussed how closely aligned the UK will be to the EU from 2021. However if a hard border with Northern Ireland is to be avoided, the backstop proposal also means the whole of the UK staying very close to the single market.
Although we do not have to be “in the single market”, the amount of variation will be tightly limited. This is likely to be another big area of disagreement for the cabinet and Brexit cabinet sub-committee. In truth, however, the cabinet has already signed up to a very high degree of alignment with the EU when they approved Mrs May’s Mansion House speech.
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
Time for a referendum in November, then.
It may be that some Brexiters, repulsed by *this* Brexit, choose to Remain. It may be that some Remainers, placated by the prospect of continued close alignment, are happy to Leave.
"DURING THE NEGOTIATIONS THE DUP WANTS TO SEE A FOCUS ON THE FOLLOWING PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES:
...
2. Ease of trade with the Irish Republic and throughout the European Union 3. Maintenance of the Common Travel Area 4. Strengthened relationships across the four components parts of the United Kingdom with no internal borders 5. Northern Ireland-specific solutions achieved through active Executive engagement 6. Particular circumstances of Northern Ireland with a land border with the EU fully reflected 7. Frictionless border with Irish Republic assisting those working or travelling in the other jurisdiction 8. Progress on new free trade deals with the rest of the world 9. Comprehensive free trade and customs agreement with the European Union 10. Northern Ireland established as a hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market 11. Customs arrangements which facilitate trade with new and existing markets ... 14. Arrangements to facilitate ease of movement of people, goods and services ..."
That looks potentially a far higher strike rate than any other party is going to have managed.
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
Time for a referendum in November, then.
It may be that some Brexiters, repulsed by *this* Brexit, choose to Remain. It may be that some Remainers, placated by the prospect of continued close alignment, are happy to Leave.
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
Time for a referendum in November, then.
It may be that some Brexiters, repulsed by *this* Brexit, choose to Remain. It may be that some Remainers, placated by the prospect of continued close alignment, are happy to Leave.
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
Time for a referendum in November, then.
It may be that some Brexiters, repulsed by *this* Brexit, choose to Remain. It may be that some Remainers, placated by the prospect of continued close alignment, are happy to Leave.
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
Time for a referendum in November, then.
It may be that some Brexiters, repulsed by *this* Brexit, choose to Remain. It may be that some Remainers, placated by the prospect of continued close alignment, are happy to Leave.
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
Except according to the Telegraph the EU has already indicated it will reject it as the plan keeps the whole of the UK in the Customs Union not just Northern Ireland and they say that is in breach of EU rules.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
While I have no doubt that Sam Coates has an inside track, his article doesn't explain what will be done about freedom of movement. The EU have consistently made it clear that the four freedoms are indivisible and that Britain can't be in the single market without freedom of movement. So how is that going to be reconciled?
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
Hasn't Hannan said something along those lines this week?
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
Time for a referendum in November, then.
It may be that some Brexiters, repulsed by *this* Brexit, choose to Remain. It may be that some Remainers, placated by the prospect of continued close alignment, are happy to Leave.
Say Hello to Prime Minister Corbyn, then.
Why?
Why not?
If May calls (or is forced into) a referendum on the deal, she can stand back from the contest and argue that she managed to negotiate the near impossible.
Meanwhile, Corbyn would have to stake out a position, presumably in opposition to 2/3 of his membership.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The wedding is not getting public funding, only the security which would be the same for any big event such as the wedding of the son or daughter or grandchild of a president
LOL , we get to pay for over 5000 police and assorted thousands other lackeys. If only we could muster that amount of police catching criminals. PS: Given their vast fortunes have been robbed from the public we are paying for the whole sh*tfest. Given they are all unemployed they could not pay anything towards it without the public cash.
While I have no doubt that Sam Coates has an inside track, his article doesn't explain what will be done about freedom of movement. The EU have consistently made it clear that the four freedoms are indivisible and that Britain can't be in the single market without freedom of movement. So how is that going to be reconciled?
We’ll be almost in the Single Market, so we’ll have almost free movement a la suisse
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Rather, it allows us to have a debate on the facts, not the delusions.
While I have no doubt that Sam Coates has an inside track, his article doesn't explain what will be done about freedom of movement. The EU have consistently made it clear that the four freedoms are indivisible and that Britain can't be in the single market without freedom of movement. So how is that going to be reconciled?
We are not going to be in the single market, just have some regulatory alignment with it to avoid a hard Brexit in Ireland.
In any case we are owed some concessions on freedom of movement after Blair refused to take the transition controls most EU nations took from 2004 to 2011 on free movement from the new accession nations
The waiting is over. Theresa May has finally chosen a side on Brexit, nearly two years after the referendum. It has not — yet — been set out explicitly. Indeed Mrs May’s language at this week’s prime minister’s questions stressed compromise and balance on the subject. However her choice is increasingly clear.
Mrs May is signalling that she will prioritise protecting the union of the United Kingdom over the need for a full future unfettered free trade policy wherever necessary. Her Brexit will do nothing to imperil the already-fragile constitutional settlement in Northern Ireland. She is gambling that a majority in her party — the Conservative and Unionist Party — will make the same judgment.....
...5 “I can’t believe it’s not the single market” Theresa May will insist the UK is leaving the single market, and in strict legal terms she is right. Ministers — even in the Brexit sub committee — have not discussed how closely aligned the UK will be to the EU from 2021. However if a hard border with Northern Ireland is to be avoided, the backstop proposal also means the whole of the UK staying very close to the single market.
Although we do not have to be “in the single market”, the amount of variation will be tightly limited. This is likely to be another big area of disagreement for the cabinet and Brexit cabinet sub-committee. In truth, however, the cabinet has already signed up to a very high degree of alignment with the EU when they approved Mrs May’s Mansion House speech.
The waiting is over. Theresa May has finally chosen a side on Brexit, nearly two years after the referendum. It has not — yet — been set out explicitly. Indeed Mrs May’s language at this week’s prime minister’s questions stressed compromise and balance on the subject. However her choice is increasingly clear.
Mrs May is signalling that she will prioritise protecting the union of the United Kingdom over the need for a full future unfettered free trade policy wherever necessary. Her Brexit will do nothing to imperil the already-fragile constitutional settlement in Northern Ireland. She is gambling that a majority in her party — the Conservative and Unionist Party — will make the same judgment.....
...5 “I can’t believe it’s not the single market” Theresa May will insist the UK is leaving the single market, and in strict legal terms she is right. Ministers — even in the Brexit sub committee — have not discussed how closely aligned the UK will be to the EU from 2021. However if a hard border with Northern Ireland is to be avoided, the backstop proposal also means the whole of the UK staying very close to the single market.
Although we do not have to be “in the single market”, the amount of variation will be tightly limited. This is likely to be another big area of disagreement for the cabinet and Brexit cabinet sub-committee. In truth, however, the cabinet has already signed up to a very high degree of alignment with the EU when they approved Mrs May’s Mansion House speech.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
I'm looking forward to it. I'm going on the march on June 23rd. I hope it equals the Iraq march.
Question: Which foreign leaders are in favour of Brexit? Answer: Trump to weaken us in trade negotiations. Putin to weaken us militarily.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
I'm looking forward to it. I'm going on the march on June 23rd. I hope it equals the Iraq march.
Question: Which foreign leaders are in favour of Brexit? Answer: Trump to weaken us in trade negotiations. Putin to weaken us militarily.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The point is Nick, few of us on here are interested. We just don’t feel the need to be churlish about it like Ms Dent Coad.
They seem like a nice couple, and well suited. Good luck to them. My slim prayer is that the papers, particularly the Mail, gives Meghan a break. If I don’t know better I’d say its antipathy toward her was because she is brown.
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The wedding is not getting public funding, only the security which would be the same for any big event such as the wedding of the son or daughter or grandchild of a president
LOL , we get to pay for over 5000 police and assorted thousands other lackeys. If only we could muster that amount of police catching criminals. PS: Given their vast fortunes have been robbed from the public we are paying for the whole sh*tfest. Given they are all unemployed they could not pay anything towards it without the public cash.
Nope. They get the cash from the Crown lands. They get 15% of the amount raised. Given that land was theirs originally I would suggest that is a good deal for the public.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
You still don't get how disliked the EU is in this country, do you?
The waiting is over. Theresa May has finally chosen a side on Brexit, nearly two years after the referendum. It has not — yet — been set out explicitly. Indeed Mrs May’s language at this week’s prime minister’s questions stressed compromise and balance on the subject. However her choice is increasingly clear.
Mrs May is signalling that she will prioritise protecting the union of the United Kingdom over the need for a full future unfettered free trade policy wherever necessary. Her Brexit will do nothing to imperil the already-fragile constitutional settlement in Northern Ireland. She is gambling that a majority in her party — the Conservative and Unionist Party — will make the same judgment.....
...5 “I can’t believe it’s not the single market” Theresa May will insist the UK is leaving the single market, and in strict legal terms she is right. Ministers — even in the Brexit sub committee — have not discussed how closely aligned the UK will be to the EU from 2021. However if a hard border with Northern Ireland is to be avoided, the backstop proposal also means the whole of the UK staying very close to the single market.
Although we do not have to be “in the single market”, the amount of variation will be tightly limited. This is likely to be another big area of disagreement for the cabinet and Brexit cabinet sub-committee. In truth, however, the cabinet has already signed up to a very high degree of alignment with the EU when they approved Mrs May’s Mansion House speech.
Actually I see my polite lack of interest is generally shared - two thirds of the public aren't interested in the wedding (with little difference between the parties) and dislike it getting public funding, though they like the Queen and would not favour abolishing the monarchy (though only 30% feel strongly).
The wedding is not getting public funding, only the security which would be the same for any big event such as the wedding of the son or daughter or grandchild of a president
LOL , we get to pay for over 5000 police and assorted thousands other lackeys. If only we could muster that amount of police catching criminals. PS: Given their vast fortunes have been robbed from the public we are paying for the whole sh*tfest. Given they are all unemployed they could not pay anything towards it without the public cash.
Firstly, being Head of State is by no means unemployed, nor was service in the armed forces as Harry undertook, nor was being a successful Hollywood actress as Meghan Markle was.
Though of course even in the unlikely event you ever get an independent Scotland both Salmond and Sturgeon have affirmed the British monarch would remain the monarch of Scotland as befits their descendance from the ancient monarchs of Scotland through James 1st and his mother Mary Queen of Scots
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
I'm looking forward to it. I'm going on the march on June 23rd. I hope it equals the Iraq march.
Question: Which foreign leaders are in favour of Brexit? Answer: Trump to weaken us in trade negotiations. Putin to weaken us militarily.
Probably be about as effective as the Iraq march, too.
I don’t agree because although the Iraq March did nothing to change policy directly, it was part of a society-wide turn against foreign adventures which in large part ended Blair’s premiership and continues to cast a long shadow on foreign policy (see the recent Syria debate). And look at Blair now.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
Surely we are due a second AV referendum first?
Technically the 2016 EU referendum was the second EEC/EU referendum anyway with the first in 1975
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
If we have a second referendum then Leave will get a bigger win. People really dislike being told they got it wrong and have to try again.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
If we have a second referendum then Leave will get a bigger win. People really dislike being told they got it wrong and have to try again.
I'm pretty confident about that, too.
Especially as the Govt. would have to remain neutral.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
If we have a second referendum then Leave will get a bigger win. People really dislike being told they got it wrong and have to try again.
Yep. I think Brexit would still win, on balance - partly for the reason you cite.
But we would have an airing of the facts and once decided I for one would consider the matter closed.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
If we have a second referendum then Leave will get a bigger win. People really dislike being told they got it wrong and have to try again.
Yep. I think Brexit would still win, on balance - partly for the reason you cite.
But we would have an airing of the facts and once decided I for one would consider the matter closed.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
If we have a second referendum then Leave will get a bigger win. People really dislike being told they got it wrong and have to try again.
I'm pretty confident about that, too.
Especially as the Govt. would have to remain neutral.
Then we're all agreed it's the best thing to do to get a national consensus about the path we're about to embark on?
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
Why on earth is she going to hold a second referendum? Why?
She’ll be frog marched out of No 10 pronto by the Tory party. They don’t want another round, neither do their voters by and large I’d assume, and really as long as they can muster votes of confidence in the HoC that’s that.
As I have said repeatedly we wont end up leaving the EU at all.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
May's allowed Brexit to self-destruct pretty skillfully. Now we're at the stage where erstwhile Leavers will start saying there's no point and we'll end up having a second referendum which will settle the issue.
I would say though that a 2nd referendum takes us into very dangerous territory as far as division in the country is concerned.
Other countries manage to hold second referendums without too many problems. We've all been on a learning curve over the past 2 years and it's only Conservative voters holding up the "right to Leave" side at the moment. If figures like Boris and Gove switch sides and adopt a more sober tone it will allow people space to reconsider.
Why on earth is she going to hold a second referendum? Why?
She’ll be frog marched out of No 10 pronto by the Tory party. They don’t want another round, neither do their voters by and large I’d assume, and really as long as they can muster votes of confidence in the HoC that’s that.
She may be forced to by parliament. As to why: in order to rectify the mess Cameron wrought.
Comments
Plenty of conservative dynasties too, see the Bushes, the Churchills, the Gummers etc
https://www.republic.org.uk/sites/default/files/Republic_MonarchyResults_180511.pdf
- BoJo in 2005
Charity’s bus impounded after police claim there was an issue with the driver’s licence"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/18/royal-wedding-windsor-police-seize-rough-sleepers-bus
"Mansplain it to them!"
https://order-order.com/
They seem like a nice couple, and well suited. Good luck to them. My slim prayer is that the papers, particularly the Mail, gives Meghan a break. If I don’t know better I’d say its antipathy toward her was because she is brown.
May is a conservative. She’s one of the few true conservatives in the Conservatives.
a) regularly scheduled with the same number appointed each time.
b) proportional to the results of the last election with perhaps a 40% allowance for cross benchers.
An even better tweak would be to remove it appointments from the patronage of the party leaders and given over to an impartial committee, albeit seeking the approval of the relevant party leader (basically the reverse of what we have at present).
Emma Dent Coad
Republicans are increasingly fearful of voicing opposition to the royals. But we must be bold and demand a debate on this anachronistic institution"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/18/royal-wedding-shamed-silence-emma-dent-coad
Oh and I did think that Charles (of whom I am not a great fan) stepping in in place of the father of the bride was a very nice touch.
Since I don't have a TV, it's easy for me to give all the festivities a miss, but I'm very pleased to see all the people who do enjoy it, having the opportunity to celebrate along with the happy couple & their families.
The only thing left was to work out where my Dukedom was going to be.
Limit the number of Lords to say 300 or 400.
All life peerages but absolute maximum age of 80 then must retire.
All replacements by independent committee but with the aim to represent all walks of life. Generally candidates would be those who have achieved success in their chosen careers whether that is industry, charity, politics, trade unionism, business, science or the arts. Or community leaders etc.
Ban whipping in the Lords. Every vote must be a free vote.
Of course I’d also get rid of the remaining hereditaries.
That'll be Momentum no doubt.
The waiting is over. Theresa May has finally chosen a side on Brexit, nearly two years after the referendum. It has not — yet — been set out explicitly. Indeed Mrs May’s language at this week’s prime minister’s questions stressed compromise and balance on the subject. However her choice is increasingly clear.
Mrs May is signalling that she will prioritise protecting the union of the United Kingdom over the need for a full future unfettered free trade policy wherever necessary. Her Brexit will do nothing to imperil the already-fragile constitutional settlement in Northern Ireland. She is gambling that a majority in her party — the Conservative and Unionist Party — will make the same judgment.....
...5 “I can’t believe it’s not the single market” Theresa May will insist the UK is leaving the single market, and in strict legal terms she is right. Ministers — even in the Brexit sub committee — have not discussed how closely aligned the UK will be to the EU from 2021. However if a hard border with Northern Ireland is to be avoided, the backstop proposal also means the whole of the UK staying very close to the single market.
Although we do not have to be “in the single market”, the amount of variation will be tightly limited. This is likely to be another big area of disagreement for the cabinet and Brexit cabinet sub-committee. In truth, however, the cabinet has already signed up to a very high degree of alignment with the EU when they approved Mrs May’s Mansion House speech.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/the-week-theresa-may-picked-a-side-on-brexit-bgb0zr66f
9 The EU probably isn’t going to reject it
If Brexiteers hope this plan will be rubbished by Brussels, and they can let the rest of the EU27 kill it, they should think again. Common sense suggests the broad outline of the plan agreed by cabinet was to some degree signed off in secret by Brussels before Tuesday’s meeting. Indeed this means the whole thing could be done and dusted in October, rather than later in the autumn.
So Ireland is stopping Britain leaving the EU?
This will end well...
You're Daisy. Obv.
2) If your premise is true then there's a certain irony to that given the lack of manumission we inflicted on Ireland for so long.
It may be that some Brexiters, repulsed by *this* Brexit, choose to Remain. It may be that some Remainers, placated by the prospect of continued close alignment, are happy to Leave.
https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/997524710886903808
http://www.mydup.com/publications/view/2017-westminster-manifesto
"DURING THE NEGOTIATIONS THE DUP WANTS TO SEE
A FOCUS ON THE FOLLOWING PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES:
...
2. Ease of trade with the Irish Republic and throughout the European Union
3. Maintenance of the Common Travel Area
4. Strengthened relationships across the four components parts of the United Kingdom with no internal borders
5. Northern Ireland-specific solutions achieved through active Executive engagement
6. Particular circumstances of Northern Ireland with a land border with the EU fully reflected
7. Frictionless border with Irish Republic assisting those working or travelling in the other jurisdiction
8. Progress on new free trade deals with the rest of the world
9. Comprehensive free trade and customs agreement with the European Union
10. Northern Ireland established as a hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market
11. Customs arrangements which facilitate trade with new and existing markets
...
14. Arrangements to facilitate ease of movement of people, goods
and services
..."
That looks potentially a far higher strike rate than any other party is going to have managed.
If this is BINO then that doesn't count for my prediction. But BINO will probably bring May's government down and then who knows; 2nd ref etc etc.
I am still (very slimly) on course...
@britainelects
5h5 hours ago
Westminster voting intention:
CON: 43% (-)
LAB: 38% (-)
LDEM: 9% (-)
UKIP: 3% (+1)
GRN: 3% (+1)
[Oth]: 4% (-2)
via @YouGov, 13 - 14 May"
twitter.com/britainelects/status/997458152139509760
This is the 5th YouGov poll in a row with almost identical figures. Four of them were 43/38 and one 42/38.
https://twitter.com/msmithsonpb/status/997524406393024518?s=21
Meanwhile, Corbyn would have to stake out a position, presumably in opposition to 2/3 of his membership.
PS: Given their vast fortunes have been robbed from the public we are paying for the whole sh*tfest. Given they are all unemployed they could not pay anything towards it without the public cash.
In any case we are owed some concessions on freedom of movement after Blair refused to take the transition controls most EU nations took from 2004 to 2011 on free movement from the new accession nations
Question: Which foreign leaders are in favour of Brexit?
Answer: Trump to weaken us in trade negotiations. Putin to weaken us militarily.
Stronger Together.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-44129525/trump-helped-europe-lose-its-illusions-says-tusk
Though of course even in the unlikely event you ever get an independent Scotland both Salmond and Sturgeon have affirmed the British monarch would remain the monarch of Scotland as befits their descendance from the ancient monarchs of Scotland through James 1st and his mother Mary Queen of Scots
Brexit is this generation’s Iraq War.
Technically the 2016 EU referendum was the second EEC/EU referendum anyway with the first in 1975
Especially as the Govt. would have to remain neutral.
But we would have an airing of the facts and once decided I for one would consider the matter closed.
She’ll be frog marched out of No 10 pronto by the Tory party. They don’t want another round, neither do their voters by and large I’d assume, and really as long as they can muster votes of confidence in the HoC that’s that.
As to why: in order to rectify the mess Cameron wrought.