Why on earth should Remainers give full support to a woman who labelled them citizens of nowhere? Stockholm syndrome is not a satisfactory answer.
Because it is in the national interest to do so and that is more important than a stupid piece of psychobabble that May clearly only half understood more than a year ago.
So, Stockholm syndrome. Enabling the policy desires of those who chose to promote xenophobic lies in order to secure their main objective is not in the national interest, even when done in order to secure the position of a woman who felt it a good idea to insult those whose support she now apparently needs.
We are leaving Alastair. All that is up for discussion is the terms. And they can be good or bad. And May didn't tell any xenophobic lies. She was on your side, remember?
Candidly I’m not very interested in the terms of Brexit. They’ll be available if the UK chooses to take them, but with few parameters that are interestingly negotiable. I’m not going to invest any energy in supporting a government that is acting in a manner that is utterly damaging to the country’s interests. I’d rather move onto the next stage of the spiral down, which is coming soon enough.
Candidly, I don't see the terms of Brexit making that much of a difference. But how it leaves both our relations with the EU and with each other in this country is much more important. I want a deal that brings us together and leaves us with good relations with the EU. A bad deal will be divisive at both ends.
There is going to be either what you consider in those terms a bad deal or no deal, as per my article. This is all an inevitable consequence of how the referendum was won.
You have said in the past that the 2 posters (the Turkey one and Farage’s 1930’s one) are the xenophobic lies which have in your view tainted the Leave campaign. I hope I have accurately reflected your view.
If that is correct, would you be less concerned at a Leave win based on immigration control but without those posters/claims? And what difference do you think such a win would have made?
Any Leave win requiring some control over FOM would still limit the options available to Britain, regardless of what lies were told about Turkey. But perhaps I have misunderstood?
That needs a longer answer than I have time for now (housework calls). I will try to answer this later.
Mr. Urquhart, if he's guilty, a ban seems eminently sensible. If he hasn't been found guilty, it seems crackers.
F1: going to set about writing the pre-race ramble, which is tricky with the limited markets. I'll wait until midday, just in case more markets start getting put up, but it's a bit rubbish they've suddenly decided to put up just 11.
The government is in the happy position of knowing that whatever it does, however badly it is split, however disastrously Brexit turns out, Jeremy Corbyn guarantees that the Tories will win the next general election.
I believe you said that in 2017 too. It wasn't true then so why should it be different next time? Nobody won the last election - remaining in office via support of the DUP does not constitute 'winning'.More likely to be a 'time for a change' feeling at the next election too.
Since when did Jeremy Corbyn win the 2017 general election? The Tories still won over 50 more seats than Labour did and provided they roughly hold their 42% voteshare against Corbyn will win again next time too as Major won in 1992 after 13 years in power by winning 41.9%, losing only 0.3% of the 42.2% Thatcher got in 1987
I have never suggested that he did! Nobody won the 2017 election - as is apparent from the need to secure the support of another party in order to remain in office.
In terms of most votes and seats the Tories won and enough seats to form a government with a conservative leaning party, the DUP
For the zillionth time, it isn't about razor wire, it is about having the right to live, work and claim benefits in the UK.
Because the Hostile Environment policy makes every British citizen simultaneously a border guard working for Her Majesty's Government and an illegal alien if there is a minor irregularity with their papers.
What a sorry state of affairs.
Welcome to the 21st century. Some of us have been here a while but it's good to have you on board.
You acknowledge it's a sorry state of affairs?
I thought Labour supporters were in favour of the bureaucratic state ?
If Labour had won in 2010 we'd now be obliged to carry ID cards and be required to produce them on request.
Sounds good to me , plus DNA taken at birth, would help in many areas.
We could cover London in CCTV cameras and completely eliminate crime.
CCTV and DNA has helped solved crime.
I would have no problem carrying an ID card and giving a DNA sample.
Yes they have -- cctv and DNA have solved crimes -- but they do not seem to have prevented crime. This is counter-intuitive, perhaps, but here we are.
True , however DNA has helped prevent further crimes been undertaken by people who would have continued such crimes from burglary to rapes and murder.
" ... for this drivel apparently aimed at voters with the attention span of a doughnut,"
Oi! I'm a voter and my attention span is much greater than that of a ...
Hang on, what time's the F1 on?
Lol. Many a true word, though. I should like voters to be intensely engaged and prepared to be sulphurous, but in reality most people don't care that much either way. Asked for an opinion, they gave one, but that didn't mean they were all LibDems or UKIP on the subject. They can see it's difficult, can't be bothered to follow the details, and will take a final view about the Government's competence when they see how it works out.
The EU will offer a fudge which is essentially pretty close to "little change for now, potential for change in the future, subject to further discussions in a few years' time". If May settles for that and gets it past her party, most voters will think that's not too bad, now let's talk about the economy, the NHS, etc.
Totally agree with that. Brexit is not a very salient issue for most people.
Yet the EU referendum had a higher turnout at 72% than any UK general election since 1992
That does not contradict my point at all. The electorate had had the EU issue rammed down their throats for months prior to the Referendum - in a much more intense way than occurred in 1975.Not particularly surprising that most voters were sufficiently engaged to cast a vote - though turnout was still well below the level we saw in Scotland in 2014 for the Independence Referendum. Moreover , only a minority of those who voted are likely to have had strong views one way or the other - for many it was a 55/45 or 60/40 decision at most.
Many voted in the EU referendum who never normally vote in general elections because issues of sovereignty and immigration were so important to them, just as in Scotland many normally non voters turned out because the issue of whether their country should be independent or remain part of the UK was so important to them
Very unlikely in my view - most people found it a highly technical issue and were keen to get rid of it after many months of noise and intensive campaigning.
Then how do you explain the fact turnout was up 6% at the 2016 EU referendum at 72% on the 66% who voted at the 2015 general election?
Leave won partly because working class normally non voters were so determined to make their voice heard on issues like immigration
See the government is considering destroying the parasitic buy to let industry by making shortest tenancies 3 years (with a sensible exception for students).
Gets my vote.
And mine. Long overdue and with slashing of fees letting agents can charge we may well see many fewer letting agents
Mine too but I'm not holding my breath. Once the Tories realise they will lose a few votes over this they'll quetly drop it. (Worker representatives on boards, self-employed NI changes, Social care reforms, etc.)
This will not be dropped - the reduction in fees has already been announced and this was included in a package announced on Marr today
The fees are a done deal and the best Labour can say about security of tenure is "it's not enough"
Labour set response to everything the conservatives announce including Corbyn today on TM's 20 billion NHS yearly injection, but who was later contradicted by Simon Stevens, CEO of NHS England
Mrs May is quite unsuited to be Prime Minister, of course. The problem isn`t really Brexit and the stance of the EU. It is the fact that the Conservative Party is an unholy gang of chancers and schemers, held together only because they loath Mr Corbyn and his Labour Party even more than they loath one another.
Do they have anybody who could hold them together and provide some leadership for the nation? Certainly not Rees-Mogg, Gove, Hunt, Javid and all the other names that the PB Tories like to play with. The sooner the Conservative Party splits up and different factions go their separate way, the better for the county.
Introducing STV would help this process, of course. It would also help Labour to split up and provide more coherent alternatives.
The government is in the happy position of knowing that whatever it does, however badly it is split, however disastrously Brexit turns out, Jeremy Corbyn guarantees that the Tories will win the next general election.
I believe you said that in 2017 too. It wasn't true then so why should it be different next time? Nobody won the last election - remaining in office via support of the DUP does not constitute 'winning'.More likely to be a 'time for a change' feeling at the next election too.
Since when did Jeremy Corbyn win the 2017 general election? The Tories still won over 50 more seats than Labour did and provided they roughly hold their 42% voteshare against Corbyn will win again next time too as Major won in 1992 after 13 years in power by winning 41.9%, losing only 0.3% of the 42.2% Thatcher got in 1987
I have never suggested that he did! Nobody won the 2017 election - as is apparent from the need to secure the support of another party in order to remain in office.
In terms of most votes and seats the Tories won and enough seats to form a government with a conservative leaning party, the DUP
That still did not amount to 'winning'. May remaining in office was - and continues to be - contingent on the attitude adopted by another party. Moreover, the DUP has in the past been a much less natural ally for the Tories than the Ulster Unionists.
Mrs May is quite unsuited to be Prime Minister, of course. The problem isn`t really Brexit and the stance of the EU. It is the fact that the Conservative Party is an unholy gang of chancers and schemers, held together only because they loath Mr Corbyn and his Labour Party even more than they loath one another.
Do they have anybody who could hold them together and provide some leadership for the nation? Certainly not Rees-Mogg, Gove, Hunt, Javid and all the other names that the PB Tories like to play with. The sooner the Conservative Party splits up and different factions go their separate way, the better for the county.
Introducing STV would help this process, of course. It would also help Labour to split up and provide more coherent alternatives.
How's your unholy gang of chancers and schemers doing. Figured out what they are for, what policies they have?
Of course, after decades of working to become part of a Coalition, you can no longer mention the C-word in the LibDems. So how do you go back to your constituencies and prepare for Government these days?
" ... for this drivel apparently aimed at voters with the attention span of a doughnut,"
Oi! I'm a voter and my attention span is much greater than that of a ...
Hang on, what time's the F1 on?
Lol. Many a true word, though. I should like voters to be intensely engaged and prepared to be sulphurous, but in reality most people don't care that much either way. Asked for an opinion, they gave one, but that didn't mean they were all LibDems or UKIP on the subject. They can see it's difficult, can't be bothered to follow the details, and will take a final view about the Government's competence when they see how it works out.
The EU will offer a fudge which is essentially pretty close to "little change for now, potential for change in the future, subject to further discussions in a few years' time". If May settles for that and gets it past her party, most voters will think that's not too bad, now let's talk about the economy, the NHS, etc.
Totally agree with that. Brexit is not a very salient issue for most people.
Yet the EU referendum had a higher turnout at 72% than any UK general election since 1992
That does not contradict my point at all. The electorate had had the EU issue rammed down their throats for months prior to the Referendum - in a much more intense way than occurred in 1975.Not particularly surprising that most voters were sufficiently engaged to cast a vote - though turnout was still well below the level we saw in Scotland in 2014 for the Independence Referendum. Moreover , only a minority of those who voted are likely to have had strong views one way or the other - for many it was a 55/45 or 60/40 decision at most.
Many voted in the EU referendum who never normally vote in general elections because issues of sovereignty and immigration were so important to them, just as in Scotland many normally non voters turned out because the issue of whether their country should be independent or remain part of the UK was so important to them
Very unlikely in my view - most people found it a highly technical issue and were keen to get rid of it after many months of noise and intensive campaigning.
Then how do you explain the fact turnout was up 6% at the 2016 EU referendum at 72% on the 66% who voted at the 2015 general election?
Leave won partly because working class normally non voters were so determined to make their voice heard on issues like immigration
The intensity of the campaign leading up to it over a more extended period.
We are in an Alice through the looking glass world these days, were the conservatives don't conserve and instead spend their days attacking business and institutions like the judiciary they used to reckon were the bedrock of the UK.
The government is in the happy position of knowing that whatever it does, however badly it is split, however disastrously Brexit turns out, Jeremy Corbyn guarantees that the Tories will win the next general election.
I believe you said that in 2017 too. It wasn't true then so why should it be different next time? Nobody won the last election - remaining in office via support of the DUP does not constitute 'winning'.More likely to be a 'time for a change' feeling at the next election too.
Since when did Jeremy Corbyn win the 2017 general election? The Tories still won over 50 more seats than Labour did and provided they roughly hold their 42% voteshare against Corbyn will win again next time too as Major won in 1992 after 13 years in power by winning 41.9%, losing only 0.3% of the 42.2% Thatcher got in 1987
I have never suggested that he did! Nobody won the 2017 election - as is apparent from the need to secure the support of another party in order to remain in office.
The next few months could see the US pull all it's military out of Germany, impose 20% car tax on the EU, only do trade deals bi-laterally, and may even leave NATO.
All these scenarious have been actively floated in the last few days and all the EU can do is threaten European travel. And to think so many admire them
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
And they will see the UK voters turn against them in a big way
And this will matter because ... what? UK voters won't have a vote in EU elections after we leave.
40 billion pounds lost immediately plus chaos in all EU countries with mass unemployment and even more anti EU politicians standing for their Parliament
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
And I assume you're accepting that if Labour had won in 2010 we'd now be obliged to carry ID cards and be required to produce them on request.
That's actually incorrect. Labour policy was to issue ID cards and require that they be accepted as proof of identity, but explicitly not to require them to be produced on request. There was the "slippery slope" argument that banks etc. would start to expect them, but we were keen to avoid people getting into trouble for not carrying ID around.
Not sure if Corbyn supported the policy, mind you!
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
Is No Deal being kept as a threat to the EU or in order to threaten the Tory party with the Corbynocalypse?
If the EU carry on as they are the no deal scenario with tariffs on all imported EU goods could well receive majority support, especially at a saving of 40 billion
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
Yes and Jack W gave me a yellow card for completing the survey as a registered member but I am not greatly into conhome but that did not get the card repealed
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
... without another parliamentary bill.
Which there is no chance of turning into an act...
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
... without another parliamentary bill.
Which there is no chance of turning into an act...
Doesn't that mean that the EU-UK deal could authorise them?
"[The UK cannot]... create.. border arrangements... that: [a] did not exist before exit day and [b] are not in accordance between the UK and the EU"
Why is the EU preparing for a no deal “pathetic posturing” while the UK’s negotiating gambit to threaten no deal is somehow to be welcomed?
Apart from excusing racism, Brexitism seems to create a level of cognitive dissonance seldom seen outside mental asylums and tele-evangelist fundraisers.
The next few months could see the US pull all it's military out of Germany, impose 20% car tax on the EU, only do trade deals bi-laterally, and may even leave NATO.
All these scenarious have been actively floated in the last few days and all the EU can do is threaten European travel. And to think so many admire them
Would you prefer the EU declares war on America?
Or are you suggesting the dissolution of the Western order is somehow to be anticipated, so long as you are OK in your north Welsh armchair?
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
The EU will soon face tariffs from both post Brexit UK and Trump's USA, its 2 biggest export markets if this continues.
It is in both sides interests to do a deal of some form
And a deal will be done. Either a fuck business deal or a vassal state deal. aka Canada and Norway. Those are our deal choices beyond full membership of the EU. The UK government is not investing in making those choices clear to the UK electorate or its preferred outcome to its negotiating partners. Instead it's gone full Comical Ali while the tanks stream towards Baghdad.
Why is the EU preparing for a no deal “pathetic posturing” while the UK’s negotiating gambit to threaten no deal is somehow to be welcomed?
Apart from excusing racism, Brexitism seems to create a level of cognitive dissonance seldom seen outside mental asylums and tele-evangelist fundraisers.
Quite. If both sides had taken this position at the outset, it might have some value - not least in actually making sensible contingency plans. All it does now is make an unprepared no deal reasonably likely.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
Are you prepared to destroy the British economy just because you refuse to work with the EU system? Are you indulging in pathetic posturing? You see, it goes both ways.
The vote was to leave and the pathetic posturing is coming from the EU
In any case the possibility of No Deal is part of UK official policy and the UK side is also pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.
The EU will soon face tariffs from both post Brexit UK and Trump's USA, its 2 biggest export markets if this continues.
It is in both sides interests to do a deal of some form
And a deal will be done. Either a fuck business deal or a vassal state deal. aka Canada and Norway. Those are our deal choices beyond full membership of the EU. The UK government is not investing in making those choices clear to the UK electorate or its preferred outcome to its negotiating partners. Instead it's gone full Comical Ali while the tanks stream towards Baghdad.
You forgot option 4, ie No Deal aka full blown economic collapse.
So we can choose to: - Remain - Leave, as vassal of the EU regulatory regime - “Fuck business” and “fuck the Union” - Full economic collapse
I think it’s time to call it, the prosecco growers are not going to come to our rescue. We’ve shat the bed and now we have to figure out which of the filthy sheets is least repulsive.
Doesn't that mean that the EU-UK deal could authorise them?
"[The UK cannot]... create.. border arrangements... that: [a] did not exist before exit day and [b] are not in accordance between the UK and the EU"
I don't think so. There can be no border arrangements which involve new checks and are not in accordance with the agreement between the UK and EU.
On your reading - which I accept seems like a more natural conclusion - the EU agreement would be "downwards only" - i.e. the only time the government could (and is in fact required to) act is in the event that the EU-UK REDUCES the border.
However that conflicts with the purpose of the clause, which is negative empowerment. Because of that, and even more so since there are in fact no border facilities on the UK-Ireland border, the part of the clause I've called "B" would seem superfluous.
Doesn't that mean that the EU-UK deal could authorise them?
"[The UK cannot]... create.. border arrangements... that: [a] did not exist before exit day and [b] are not in accordance between the UK and the EU"
I don't think so. There can be no border arrangements which involve new checks and are not in accordance with the agreement between the UK and EU.
On your reading - which I accept seems like a more natural conclusion - the EU agreement would be "downwards only" - i.e. the only time the government could (and is in fact required to) act is in the event that the EU-UK REDUCES the border.
However that conflicts with the purpose of the clause, which is negative empowerment. Because of that, and even more so since there are in fact no border facilities on the UK-Ireland border, the part of the clause I've called "B" would seem superfluous.
This clause used to say "subject to an agreement between Her Majesty’s Government and the Government of Ireland" which I would have taken to have meant, no new border controls unless Dublin agrees.
As it stands, therefore, it would appear to be "no new border controls unless the EU agrees" - but I am happy to be proved wrong.
The next few months could see the US pull all it's military out of Germany, impose 20% car tax on the EU, only do trade deals bi-laterally, and may even leave NATO.
All these scenarious have been actively floated in the last few days and all the EU can do is threaten European travel. And to think so many admire them
Would you prefer the EU declares war on America?
Or are you suggesting the dissolution of the Western order is somehow to be anticipated, so long as you are OK in your north Welsh armchair?
It looks like Eddie Mair has been run out of the BBC by the humourless Brexiters who currently run it.
I thought it was related to the fact he is a big earner and one of only a few who wouldn't take a pay cut in the wake of the gender pay gap stuff?
Edit:
His departure follows a round of contract negotiations involving some of the BBC’s biggest stars, in the wake of a public outcry over the high salaries paid to leading presenters.
Earlier this year it was reported that the PM presenter, who is one of the corporation’s top earners with a salary between £300,000 and £350,000, was the last major male BBC star who was refusing to take a pay cut.
The next few months could see the US pull all it's military out of Germany, impose 20% car tax on the EU, only do trade deals bi-laterally, and may even leave NATO.
All these scenarious have been actively floated in the last few days and all the EU can do is threaten European travel. And to think so many admire them
Would you prefer the EU declares war on America?
Or are you suggesting the dissolution of the Western order is somehow to be anticipated, so long as you are OK in your north Welsh armchair?
I know you are bitter at Brexit but why pop at me who has already stated that I would be content with a softish Brexit.
The point I was making is that the threat posed to Europe by Trump is far more serious and to play childish games by threatening UK flights shows them up as vindictive and pathetic at a time when so much is causing a crisis in Europe and it is just sad
The next few months could see the US pull all it's military out of Germany, impose 20% car tax on the EU, only do trade deals bi-laterally, and may even leave NATO.
All these scenarious have been actively floated in the last few days and all the EU can do is threaten European travel. And to think so many admire them
Would you prefer the EU declares war on America?
Or are you suggesting the dissolution of the Western order is somehow to be anticipated, so long as you are OK in your north Welsh armchair?
The point I was making is that the threat posed to Europe by Trump is far more serious and to play childish games by threatening UK flights shows them up as vindictive and pathetic at a time when so much is causing a crisis in Europe and it is just sad
Some British people are just incapable of perceiving Brexit as an existential threat to the European order which is why they can't understand the EU's position or the position of the other member states.
The point I was making is that the threat posed to Europe by Trump is far more serious and to play childish games by threatening UK flights shows them up as vindictive and pathetic at a time when so much is causing a crisis in Europe and it is just sad
Some British people are just incapable of perceiving Brexit as an existential threat to the European order which is why they can't understand the EU's position or the position of the other member states.
Of course it is a threat to Europe as a successful UK off the shores of the EU would see a move for others to leave but that does not justify their lack of sensible negotiations and to threaten jobs across Europe
The point I was making is that the threat posed to Europe by Trump is far more serious and to play childish games by threatening UK flights shows them up as vindictive and pathetic at a time when so much is causing a crisis in Europe and it is just sad
Some British people are just incapable of perceiving Brexit as an existential threat to the European order which is why they can't understand the EU's position or the position of the other member states.
Of course it is a threat to Europe as a successful UK off the shores of the EU would see a move for others to leave but that does not justify their lack of sensible negotiations and to threaten jobs across Europe
If the EU carry on as they are the no deal scenario with tariffs on all imported EU goods could well receive majority support, especially at a saving of 40 billion
It is in both sides interests to do a deal of some form
For the record, are you two now recommending that the UK government impose tariffs on goods entering the UK from the EU? If so, I need to remind you that tariffs are taxes imposed on the purchasers of the goods (ie UK consumers), not the producers.
If the EU carry on as they are the no deal scenario with tariffs on all imported EU goods could well receive majority support, especially at a saving of 40 billion
It is in both sides interests to do a deal of some form
For the record, are you two now recommending that the UK government impose tariffs on goods entering the UK from the EU? If so, I need to remind you that tariffs are taxes imposed on the purchasers of the goods (ie UK consumers), not the producers.
If the EU carry on as they are the no deal scenario with tariffs on all imported EU goods could well receive majority support, especially at a saving of 40 billion
It is in both sides interests to do a deal of some form
For the record, are you two now recommending that the UK government impose tariffs on goods entering the UK from the EU? If so, I need to remind you that tariffs are taxes imposed on the purchasers of the goods (ie UK consumers), not the producers.
Tariffs are a two way street
And it would price some EU goods out of the UK market - other options are available
40 billion pounds lost immediately plus chaos in all EU countries with mass unemployment and even more anti EU politicians standing for their Parliament
I don't think Brexit will result in EU chaos and mass unemployment. There are 460 million of them and 60 million of us (rounded to nearest ten mill).
40 billion pounds lost immediately plus chaos in all EU countries with mass unemployment and even more anti EU politicians standing for their Parliament
I don't think Brexit will result in EU chaos and mass unemployment. There are 460 million of them and 60 million of us (rounded to nearest ten mill).
The point I was making is that the threat posed to Europe by Trump is far more serious and to play childish games by threatening UK flights shows them up as vindictive and pathetic at a time when so much is causing a crisis in Europe and it is just sad
Some British people are just incapable of perceiving Brexit as an existential threat to the European order which is why they can't understand the EU's position or the position of the other member states.
Brexit is only an existential threat to the European Order if the EU allows it to be. If they are sensible and take it as a warning about the way they have acted to date and change direction to suit their member states then there is no reason for it to be a threat. It may well be a threat to those who want to see a single European state but there were plenty of other reasons unconnected to Brexit why that was always going to be a bigger fight than the EU expected.
The next few months could see the US pull all it's military out of Germany, impose 20% car tax on the EU, only do trade deals bi-laterally, and may even leave NATO.
All these scenarious have been actively floated in the last few days and all the EU can do is threaten European travel. And to think so many admire them
Would you prefer the EU declares war on America?
Or are you suggesting the dissolution of the Western order is somehow to be anticipated, so long as you are OK in your north Welsh armchair?
I know you are bitter at Brexit but why pop at me who has already stated that I would be content with a softish Brexit.
The point I was making is that the threat posed to Europe by Trump is far more serious and to play childish games by threatening UK flights shows them up as vindictive and pathetic at a time when so much is causing a crisis in Europe and it is just sad
Is the EU threatening U.K. flights? As far as I can tell it is simply pointing out the consequences of a No Deal. The very No Deal you think we also ought to be preparing for.
Yes, Trump is a serious threat. Even more reason to reconsider our strategy, negotiate the softest Brexit possible, and then put the final settlement to a Vote on the Deal.
I have implemented the GDPR and appointed a Data Protection Officer to create and write the paperwork, questionnaires. Apart from that, nothing has changed !
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
No, what's happening is that they're trying to make a deal, and they've made concrete proposals, but the UK, while not agreeing to them, isn't able to come up with coherent proposals of its own because its cabinet is arguing with itself and nobody is in charge. It isn't even clear it will be able to agree to meet commitments it's already made at the end of last year, let alone all the stuff that hasn't been agreed yet.
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
And again misreading. 'Does not authorise' is not the same as 'prevents'. Either side can impose border restrictions if they chose to do so. They simply can't use the December agreement as a reason to do so.
Some British people are just incapable of perceiving Brexit as an existential threat to the European order which is why they can't understand the EU's position or the position of the other member states.
That doesn't reflect well on the EU. If Brexit is an existential threat to them, then there must be something very wrong with the way they're doing things.
Rather than threatening absurd scenarios it would make more sense if the EU focused on swapping EU aviation licenses for licenses with post Brexit UK
The EU really is pathetic with this posturing. Are they really prepared to destroy the European economy in this way just to punish Brexit?
The British government the British side doesn't get it shit together.
What are these concrete proposals that give us control of our laws, borders and trade policies
Nobody has a way to do that, because both sides agree that at least one of the UK's borders with the EU should be open, which isn't consistent with unilateral control over it.
The Irish/UK border will remain open but some monitoring will be inevitable
What do you mean by 'monitoring'? If you mean technology to track things for customs purposes that is categorically off the table.
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
And again misreading. 'Does not authorise' is not the same as 'prevents'. Either side can impose border restrictions if they chose to do so. They simply can't use the December agreement as a reason to do so.
Indeed. That seems entirely clear. I don't authorise @William Glenn to post here. That does not equate to preventing him from doing so.
Comments
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cycling/tour-de-france-2018-chris-froome-banned-drug-test-appeal-team-sky-can-he-compete-latest-news-a8425301.html
F1: going to set about writing the pre-race ramble, which is tricky with the limited markets. I'll wait until midday, just in case more markets start getting put up, but it's a bit rubbish they've suddenly decided to put up just 11.
https://twitter.com/MrJohnNicolson/status/1013367915616395264
Leave won partly because working class normally non voters were so determined to make their voice heard on issues like immigration
Having just decided something to bet on, I'm glad I thought the 1.5 on him getting points was daft (McLaren haven't scored in the last four races).
Of course, after decades of working to become part of a Coalition, you can no longer mention the C-word in the LibDems. So how do you go back to your constituencies and prepare for Government these days?
betting PostF1: lack of markets meant I ended up backing Sainz for points at 1.5. He's been driving very recently and the Renault team has few DNFs.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/07/austria-pre-race-2018.html
http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-tells-eu27-to-prepare-airports-for-no-deal-brexit-report-2018-6?r=US&IR=T
Small fire NE of Leek, Staffs now at 0.5sqkm.
All these scenarious have been actively floated in the last few days and all the EU can do is threaten European travel. And to think so many admire them
The British government will probably become somewhat less disfunctional as the crunch time gets closer, but nobody knows for sure, so the EU is preparing for what will happen in the event that the British side doesn't get it shit together.
pathetically posturingpreparing for the event.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/01/nhs-preparing-for-disruption-to-supplies-from-no-deal-brexit
Not sure if Corbyn supported the policy, mind you!
It is in both sides interests to do a deal of some form
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/07/our-survey-next-tory-leader-javid-tops-the-poll-for-the-first-time.html
The EU Withdrawal Act does not authorise the UK to:
...create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.
So no technology on the Irish border or new checks or controls of any kind.
Although David Cameron was an avid reader of PB threads but didn’t read the comments.
We’re just not as good at it.
Even though Hunt would be my biggest winner ever I’d enjoy the reaction of some on the left when the Tories have the first BAME PM.
They’ll literally go coconuts.
"[The UK cannot]... create.. border arrangements... that: [a] did not exist before exit day and [b] are not in accordance between the UK and the EU"
Apart from excusing racism, Brexitism seems to create a level of cognitive dissonance seldom seen outside mental asylums and tele-evangelist fundraisers.
Or are you suggesting the dissolution of the Western order is somehow to be anticipated, so long as you are OK in your north Welsh armchair?
If both sides had taken this position at the outset, it might have some value - not least in actually making sensible contingency plans. All it does now is make an unprepared no deal reasonably likely.
So we can choose to:
- Remain
- Leave, as vassal of the EU regulatory regime
- “Fuck business” and “fuck the Union”
- Full economic collapse
I think it’s time to call it, the prosecco growers are not going to come to our rescue. We’ve shat the bed and now we have to figure out which of the filthy sheets is least repulsive.
http://money.cnn.com/2018/06/28/technology/california-consumer-privacy-act/index.html
On your reading - which I accept seems like a more natural conclusion - the EU agreement would be "downwards only" - i.e. the only time the government could (and is in fact required to) act is in the event that the EU-UK REDUCES the border.
However that conflicts with the purpose of the clause, which is negative empowerment. Because of that, and even more so since there are in fact no border facilities on the UK-Ireland border, the part of the clause I've called "B" would seem superfluous.
As it stands, therefore, it would appear to be "no new border controls unless the EU agrees" - but I am happy to be proved wrong.
Edit:
His departure follows a round of contract negotiations involving some of the BBC’s biggest stars, in the wake of a public outcry over the high salaries paid to leading presenters.
Earlier this year it was reported that the PM presenter, who is one of the corporation’s top earners with a salary between £300,000 and £350,000, was the last major male BBC star who was refusing to take a pay cut.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jul/01/eddie-mair-to-leave-bbc-after-30-years-radio4-pm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44672218
Javid 6.1
Gove 6.8
Rees-Mogg 10.35
Hunt 14
Johnson 14.5
Next is Davidson at 29.
Is anyone still advising "never back a favourite for the Tory leadership" now that Javid is in that spot?
The point I was making is that the threat posed to Europe by Trump is far more serious and to play childish games by threatening UK flights shows them up as vindictive and pathetic at a time when so much is causing a crisis in Europe and it is just sad
More likely he refused to take a pay cut.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/31/bbc-infuriated-delay-radio-4s-eddie-mair-wage-cut-following/
Having backed Javid at nearly 60s I probably will lay him now.
All in, it is a nice problem to have.
And so it continues - the likely use of the UK government as operator of last resort.
The railways will continue to be run on private sector principles (as the Government wants) but be in public ownership (as Labour wants).
A funny old world.
NEW THREAD
Yes, Trump is a serious threat. Even more reason to reconsider our strategy, negotiate the softest Brexit possible, and then put the final settlement to a Vote on the Deal.
Its ISO 9001 all over again.