2) Support for a referendum on the deal with the option of remaining surging
3) Government support to fall
4) Markets to get spooked and companies to ramp up their plans to relocate.
Almost like the hard Brexiteers want us to Remain.
Most voters voted Leave to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration despite endless prophecies of doom from the Remain camp about the economic consequences so these notices will change few Leavers minds. In any case even if Corbyn becomes PM that makes little difference as he backs Brexit and leaving the single market as the government does
It would take an Umunna premiership or someone similar to ensure soft Brexit or a deal with the EU which does not take almost a decade to agree now
I think that’s very optimistic. You’re assuming that Leavers believed the ‘endless prophecies of doom’ (despite, of course, the Leave campaigns insisting that a land of milk and honey awaited) and chose Brexit having decided they were happy with that doom. One of the few true things May has said during this process is that “nobody voted for Brexit in order to become poorer.” If Leave voters come to believe that significant negative consequences will result, there will be rather few Leave voters pretty quickly.
While Corbyn possibly backs Brexit, he doesn’t care that much. Unlike the Leavamentalists on the right, for him it’s a means not an end. His best route to power is to position himself as the grown up who will delay Brexit by withdrawing article 50 “so that we have time to undo the mess that the Tories have made by wasting the last 2 years” and then see what happens. It doesn’t really matter at that point whether his intention is to go through with Brexit in the fullness of time as he’s unlikely to be PM by the time a final decision has to be made.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised however at how sanguine they seem to be over no deal. For example, this aircraft business. I assumed they had quietly dropped it because they realised how damaging it could be. Suddenly hey have brought it back and are screaming and shouting about the damage to the UK. But if they take their current negotiating position to its logical conclusion, every flight in Europe - possibly every flight on the planet - will be grounded on March 30th, as any aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The point that is being missed here is that
a) Plenty of people warned that triggering A50 give the EU the upper hand in negotiations, and
b) The only options ever available where Remain or WTO
None of this should be a surprise. This was always where we were going to end up.
If (IF) the govt had taken the referendum to be advisory, they could have spent the next 2-5 years building on Dave's Deal and attempting to shape, by the introduction of both existing and yet to be negotiated measures on, say, immigration, an EU membership that was acceptable to the UK. It could also have spent that time negotiating an EU from which a UK exit would be less problematic. It could then, at the end of that time, have held another in/out referendum, which, should an Out vote win, would have made it easier for the UK actually to leave.
Our problem was as you say that from the moment we triggered A50 we lost the initiative as effectively became a third country overnight with no say in anything.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised however at how sanguine they seem to be over no deal. For example, this aircraft business. I assumed they had quietly dropped it because they realised how damaging it could be. Suddenly hey have brought it back and are screaming and shouting about the damage to the UK. But if they take their current negotiating position to its logical conclusion, every flight in Europe - possibly every flight on the planet - will be grounded on March 30th, as any aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
2) Support for a referendum on the deal with the option of remaining surging
3) Government support to fall
4) Markets to get spooked and companies to ramp up their plans to relocate.
Almost like the hard Brexiteers want us to Remain.
Most voters voted Leave to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration despite endless prophecies of doom from the Remain camp about the economic consequences so these notices will change few Leavers minds. In any case even if Corbyn becomes PM that makes little difference as he backs Brexit and leaving the single market as the government does
It would take an Umunna premiership or someone similar to ensure soft Brexit or a deal with the EU which does not take almost a decade to agree now
Corbyn will shift position if necessary to be pm. His whole vague strategy leaves his options open.
Nope, Corbyn is ideologically opposed to the single market as it stops his nationalisation plans as he has made consistently clear and he needs working class Labour Leave seats for a majority and they oppose free movement
The Tory Chief Whip seems to be rather slippery - not to be trusted.
He's just taking after Walter Harrison.
Did he renege on pairing arrangements?
He did.
1976, the Labour government won by 1 vote when the Labour MP Tom Pendry voted when he was supposed to be paired. Michael Heseltine was so incensed he grabbed the mace.
He also did this on a few occasions.
Famously, he provided disguises so that Labour MPs could vote twice in a division.
The only reference I can find to his activities as a whip is in acting exceptionally honourably in choosing not to accept Wheatherill's kind gesture which would have ended Wheatherill's career and instead took the path that he knew would result in bringing down the Govt. That was pretty impressive.
His obsession with keeping Thatcher out of power was such that he frequently sailed close to the wind. He once threatened a police sergeant that he would be directing traffic on the North Circular unless he released Ian Mikardo, needed for a close vote. In January 1978 he was involved in an incident in the voting lobby while trying to prevent a government defeat on Scottish devolution. But despite his efforts, the Callaghan government collapsed after a vote of confidence was lost 311 to 310 in March 1979.
Harrison ran one of the most effective whipping operations in parliamentary history, conjuring majorities out of thin air week in, week out. Famously, he provided disguises so that Labour MPs could vote twice in a division, after the Conservatives called an unexpected vote - in breach, he thought, of an agreed deal. He registered the only half-vote recorded in Hansard, having jammed his foot in the lobby door, just as it was about to close, after being delayed because he was stuck in a lift. After a dispute with the parliamentary authorities, he was ruled to have been half in the lobby, and so a demi-vote was registered, and the day was saved for the government again.
Am a huge fan of Walter Harrison but the point I haven't explained very well is that with effective minority governments the whipping operations force good men (and women) to act in ways others would consider dishonourably.
The business about providing disguises is hilarious.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The point that is being missed here is that
a) Plenty of people warned that triggering A50 give the EU the upper hand in negotiations, and
b) The only options ever available where Remain or WTO
None of this should be a surprise. This was always where we were going to end up.
Correct, but the problem - and it is a problem - is that the EU refused to negotiate or even hold informal discussions in advance of Article 50, much less set out a clear or realistic position. One reason we're in a mess now is because May's initial proposals were rejected without discussion by the EU but only after Article 50 had been triggered.
The EU have bungled over these negotiations, and badly. They seem intent on looking like intransigent children denied a nice sweet. In this, however, they have been somewhat helped by Davis behaving in exactly the same way.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised however at how sanguine they seem to be over no deal. For example, this aircraft business. I assumed they had quietly dropped it because they realised how damaging it could be. Suddenly hey have brought it back and are screaming and shouting about the damage to the UK. But if they take their current negotiating position to its logical conclusion, every flight in Europe - possibly every flight on the planet - will be grounded on March 30th, as any aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
But as matters stand they are running the very real risk of doing a Boyle Roache - destroying the whole thing to try and preserve the remainder.
So Brandon Lewis and Julian Smith both acted dishonourably.
Unless Lewis acted in good faith having (for example) been told by Smith that he was no longer Swinson’s pair due to another Tory being absent. As I understand it, that happens fairly often where there aren’t similarly long-term absentees on both sides to pair against each other. It does place him in the difficult situation of choosing between admitting that he knowlingly broke a pairing arrangement, and lied about it afterwards, or having to accuse the chief whip of lying to him.
Or alternatively the whole story is untrue and was planted by one of the many Tory party factions who have an interest in undermining May’s leadership and whipping operation in order to advance the leadership prospects of another ambitious candidate.
How would he have explained that he was only unpaired for the two critical votes?
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised however at how sanguine they seem to be over no deal. For example, this aircraft business. I assumed they had quietly dropped it because they realised how damaging it could be. Suddenly hey have brought it back and are screaming and shouting about the damage to the UK. But if they take their current negotiating position to its logical conclusion, every flight in Europe - possibly every flight on the planet - will be grounded on March 30th, as any aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I think it’s this simple. Considerable economic damage and inconvenience to continental firms and people is a price worth paying to inflict catastrophic damage on the U.K. and subsequently achieve the reversal of Brexit.
Mr. Topping, that's a nice idea, but the EU gave Cameron sod all, and in their 'negotiation' with May they're offering to embark upon the regulatory annexation of Northern Ireland.
So Brandon Lewis and Julian Smith both acted dishonourably.
Unless Lewis acted in good faith having (for example) been told by Smith that he was no longer Swinson’s pair due to another Tory being absent. As I understand it, that happens fairly often where there aren’t similarly long-term absentees on both sides to pair against each other. It does place him in the difficult situation of choosing between admitting that he knowlingly broke a pairing arrangement, and lied about it afterwards, or having to accuse the chief whip of lying to him.
Or alternatively the whole story is untrue and was planted by one of the many Tory party factions who have an interest in undermining May’s leadership and whipping operation in order to advance the leadership prospects of another ambitious candidate.
How would he have explained that he was only unpaired for the two critical votes?
As I said yesterday, this doesn't pass the smell test.
It stinks. Shows the level of panic in the Whips office. But if it stopped May feeling she had to call another general election if she lost (as per yesterday's Times), then ends and means and all that....
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised however at how sanguine they seem to be over no deal. For example, this aircraft business. I assumed they had quietly dropped it because they realised how damaging it could be. Suddenly hey have brought it back and are screaming and shouting about the damage to the UK. But if they take their current negotiating position to its logical conclusion, every flight in Europe - possibly every flight on the planet - will be grounded on March 30th, as any aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I think it’s this simple. Considerable economic damage and inconvenience to continental firms and people is a price worth paying to inflict catastrophic damage on the U.K. and subsequently the reversal of Brexit.
This coming from 'Royal Blue' – someone who has openly admitted that major economic damage to the UK is a price worth paying to see his precious Brexit through. Forgive me if I find you to be an utter hypocrite, and a wrecker.
a) Plenty of people warned that triggering A50 give the EU the upper hand in negotiations, and
b) The only options ever available where Remain or WTO
None of this should be a surprise. This was always where we were going to end up.
Correct, but the problem - and it is a problem - is that the EU refused to negotiate or even hold informal discussions in advance of Article 50, much less set out a clear or realistic position.
Well, they were not the ones leaving. If they had set out a position the Brexiteers would have gone crazy and started accusing the EU of telling us what our agreements should be.
I am sorry, but it was up to us to come up the the plan outlining what relationship we wanted. Instead we have piddled around for two years telling the EU that we wanted to cherrypick when the one thing they told us we could not have was cherrypicking.
One reason we're in a mess now is because May's initial proposals were rejected without discussion by the EU but only after Article 50 had been triggered.
Nobody made Mrs May trigger A50. Plenty of people told her not to do so until the initial positions were worked out in detail. Instead she sent a courier to Brussels with no advance warning or publicity and the first we knew was a photo of Barnier being handed an envelope. Echoes of Brown skulking around the edges of the Lisbon Treaty there...
The EU have bungled over these negotiations, and badly. They seem intent on looking like intransigent children denied a nice sweet. In this, however, they have been somewhat helped by Davis behaving in exactly the same way.
What are they supposed to have negotiated on? We only drew up our own position last month and we are still busy fiddling with it and mistranslating it into gibberish.
The Tory Chief Whip seems to be rather slippery - not to be trusted.
He's just taking after Walter Harrison.
Did he renege on pairing arrangements?
He did.
1976, the Labour government won by 1 vote when the Labour MP Tom Pendry voted when he was supposed to be paired. Michael Heseltine was so incensed he grabbed the mace.
He also did this on a few occasions.
Famously, he provided disguises so that Labour MPs could vote twice in a division.
The only reference I can find to his activities as a whip is in acting exceptionally honourably in choosing not to accept Wheatherill's kind gesture which would have ended Wheatherill's career and instead took the path that he knew would result in bringing down the Govt. That was pretty impressive.
Harrison ran one of the most effective whipping operations in parliamentary history, conjuring majorities out of thin air week in, week out. Famously, he provided disguises so that Labour MPs could vote twice in a division, after the Conservatives called an unexpected vote - in breach, he thought, of an agreed deal. He registered the only half-vote recorded in Hansard, having jammed his foot in the lobby door, just as it was about to close, after being delayed because he was stuck in a lift. After a dispute with the parliamentary authorities, he was ruled to have been half in the lobby, and so a demi-vote was registered, and the day was saved for the government again.
Am a huge fan of Walter Harrison but the point I haven't explained very well is that with effective minority governments the whipping operations force good men (and women) to act in ways others would consider dishonourably.
The business about providing disguises is hilarious.
Disguises? That sounds unbelievable. I'm surprised they didn't end up in jail.
Do wonder if this is making a second referendum likelier. Also, the chance of the EU giving absolutely nothing, making it (perhaps) a binary choice between no deal at all, or a second referendum.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised however at how sanguine they seem to be over no deal. For example, this aircraft business. I assumed they had quietly dropped it because they realised how damaging it could be. Suddenly hey have brought it back and are screaming and shouting about the damage to the UK. But if they take their current negotiating position to its logical conclusion, every flight in Europe - possibly every flight on the planet - will be grounded on March 30th, as any aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
All of which was pointed out prior to the referendum and dismissed as "Project Fear"
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I think it’s this simple. Considerable economic damage and inconvenience to continental firms and people is a price worth paying to inflict catastrophic damage on the U.K. and subsequently the reversal of Brexit.
This coming from 'Royal Blue' – someone who has openly admitted that major economic damage to the UK is a price worth paying to see his precious Brexit through. Forgive me if I find you to be an utter hypocrite, and a wrecker.
How am I a hypocrite? I think short-term economic damage is a price worth paying for national independence. You value short-term material considerations more. It’s not my fault that you are too narrow-minded to accept that other people have different political priorities.
All I have done is set out what I think the EU27’s reasoning is. I don’t personally think no deal would be catastrophic economically (damaging and catastrophic not being synonyms), and I think it could kill pro-European sentiment in this country for a generation.
If you don't like Apple products nobody is forcing you to buy them. You seem slightly obsessed by Apple, Francis!
It’s a bit of a running joke, where TSE won’t hear a bad word against them. But like Radiohead and RCS.
In all seriousness though, apple do appear to have a QA problem for both their hardware and software, something that certainly wasn’t true in the past (at least not at the scale now, where ever iOS update has a problem and all their new hardware).
Our problem was as you say that from the moment we triggered A50 we lost the initiative as effectively became a third country overnight with no say in anything.
Given the weather, however, there must be sunny uplands somewhere in the UK so the Brexiteers got that much right.
Brandon Lewis's behaviour seems at least as disgraceful. Not only did he welch on the pairing arrangement (two of his colleagues ignored the whip's dodgy diktat), he brazenly lied about it afterwards. What a c***.
'We see the utter loss of shame among political leaders where they're caught in a lie and they just double down and they lie some more.'
The Tory Chief Whip seems to be rather slippery - not to be trusted.
He's just taking after Walter Harrison.
Did he renege on pairing arrangements?
He did.
1976, the Labour government won by 1 vote when the Labour MP Tom Pendry voted when he was supposed to be paired. Michael Heseltine was so incensed he grabbed the mace.
He also did this on a few occasions.
Famously, he provided disguises so that Labour MPs could vote twice in a division.
The only reference I can find to his activities as a whip is in acting exceptionally honourably in choosing not to accept Wheatherill's kind gesture which would have ended Wheatherill's career and instead took the path that he knew would result in bringing down the Govt. That was pretty impressive.
His obsession with keeping Thatcher out of power was such that he frequently sailed close to the wind. He once threatened a police sergeant that he would be directing traffic on the North Circular unless he released Ian Mikardo, needed for a close vote. In January 1978 he was involved in an incident in the voting lobby while trying to prevent a government defeat on Scottish devolution. But despite his efforts, the Callaghan government collapsed after a vote of confidence was lost 311 to 310 in March 1979.
Harrison ran one of the most effective whipping operations in parliamentary history, conjuring majorities out of thin air week in, week out. Famously, he provided disguises so that Labour MPs could vote twice in a division, after the Conservatives called an unexpected vote - in breach, he thought, of an agreed deal. He registered the only half-vote recorded in Hansard, having jammed his foot in the lobby door, just as it was about to close, after being delayed because he was stuck in a lift. After a dispute with the parliamentary authorities, he was ruled to have been half in the lobby, and so a demi-vote was registered, and the day was saved for the government again.
Am a huge fan of Walter Harrison but the point I haven't explained very well is that with effective minority governments the whipping operations force good men (and women) to act in ways others would consider dishonourably.
By the sounds of it he did what he did because he thought (rightly or wrongly) he was countering an unfairness if he didn't. It sounds like ruthless but fair (at least in his eyes) fits the bill. I love the idea of a 1/2 vote. His actions that in effect brought down the Govt do not fit the description of someone who is ruthless at all costs.He acted very honourably.
If you've ever watched the play This House you'll always have a soft spot for Walter Harrison, Bob Mellish, Michael Cocks, and the rest of the Labour whips from 1974 to 1979.
Michael Cocks was of course one among many Cocks elected to the House in the twentieth century.
If you've ever watched the play This House you'll always have a soft spot for Walter Harrison, Bob Mellish, Michael Cocks, and the rest of the Labour whips from 1974 to 1979.
Michael Cocks was of course one among many Cocks elected to the House in the twentieth century.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised ho aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I think it’s this simple. Considerable economic damage and inconvenience to continental firms and people is a price worth paying to inflict catastrophic damage on the U.K. and subsequently the reversal of Brexit.
This coming from 'Royal Blue' – someone who has openly admitted that major economic damage to the UK is a price worth paying to see his precious Brexit through. Forgive me if I find you to be an utter hypocrite, and a wrecker.
2) Support for a referendum on the deal with the option of remaining surging
3) Government support to fall
4) Markets to get spooked and companies to ramp up their plans to relocate.
Almost like the hard Brexiteers want us to Remain.
Most voters voted Leave to regain sovereignty and reduce immigration despite endless prophecies of doom from the Remain camp about the economic consequences so these notices will change few Leavers minds. In any case even if Corbyn becomes PM that makes little difference as he backs Brexit and leaving the single market as the government does
It would take an Umunna premiership or someone similar to ensure soft Brexit or a deal with the EU which does not take almost a decade to agree now
Corbyn will shift position if necessary to be pm. His whole vague strategy leaves his options open.
Nope, Corbyn is ideologically opposed to the single market as it stops his nationalisation plans as he has made consistently clear and he needs working class Labour Leave seats for a majority and they oppose free movement
"as he has made consistently clear"
Er, when? I think you are again presenting your own opinion as fact.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
I am genuinely surprised ho aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I think it’s this simple. Considerable economic damage and inconvenience to continental firms and people is a price worth paying to inflict catastrophic damage on the U.K. and subsequently the reversal of Brexit.
This coming from 'Royal Blue' – someone who has openly admitted that major economic damage to the UK is a price worth paying to see his precious Brexit through. Forgive me if I find you to be an utter hypocrite, and a wrecker.
The business about providing disguises is hilarious.
Cracks me up every time.
There were occasions where he tried to persuade the Commons maintenance staff not to fix the door to a room the Tories used to meet in.
The entrance to the room had a history of getting stuck and Harrison was hoping that one day it might be useful in winning a vote if 40 Tory MPs were trapped in a room whilst the vote was going on.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Brandon Lewis's behaviour seems at least as disgraceful. Not only did he welch on the pairing arrangement (two of his colleagues ignored the whip's dodgy diktat), he brazenly lied about it afterwards. What a c***.
'We see the utter loss of shame among political leaders where they're caught in a lie and they just double down and they lie some more.'
Yes, this was an utterly disgusting episode and Lewis and the odious Leadsom should hang their heads in shame. One can only speculate as to what depths these people are prepared to plunge.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I don't think they are determined to have a 'terrible' Brexit. Quite simply they have one member state the Republic of Ireland who are demanding no hard border in Ireland. That means they will not agree to NI leaving the customs union. Simple as. I would have expected them to negotiate on that because it is the request of one small state and doesn't threaten the integrity of the EU. Given Britain has given way on everything else - not surprising since we seemed to have delusions of having plus eating cake - they'll probably expect the same with this. And didn't May commit to no hard border in her backstop? (I forget amidst all this business).
There is zero excuse for not doing an absolutely perfect job on it. Pathetic.
Some of the translation 'mistakes' seem quite apposite: One Welsh speaker told EURACTIV that the Welsh version uses the word ‘cenhadaeth’ to denote the mission of an organisation but pointed out that another meaning of ‘cenhadaeth’ is ‘religious evangelism’....
Misspelling the names of countries perhaps less so.
Well, 'missionary work' in English, but that includes conversion at home as well as abroad. So definitely aposite!
This one amused me:
Twitter users also pointed out that the German translation is full of archaic terminology, seemingly invented compound words and some even called it “unreadable”.
And yet the Germans don't seem at all appreciative about this graceful compliment to their language, which is invariably full of archaic terminology, invented compound words (often a peculiar mix of German and English) and if done corrrectly wholly unreadable.
LOL. Perhaps the whole thing was an extended exercise in subtle trolling ?
Re holidays in the UK - very few places are as beautiful as the Duddon valley in the western Lake District. The drive over the fells into Broughton and Millom with the estuary in the far distance is glorious as is the drive from Ulverston to Millom with on the right Coniston water glinting in the distance. And the views from Black Combe .......
Anyway, I suppose I’d better go shopping for beans and lentils today .......
I'm not surprised and it was one of several reasons why I voted remain.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I think it’s this simple. Considerable economic damage and inconvenience to continental firms and people is a price worth paying to inflict catastrophic damage on the U.K. and subsequently the reversal of Brexit.
This coming from 'Royal Blue' – someone who has openly admitted that major economic damage to the UK is a price worth paying to see his precious Brexit through. Forgive me if I find you to be an utter hypocrite, and a wrecker.
How am I a hypocrite? I think short-term economic damage is a price worth paying for national independence. You value short-term material considerations more. It’s not my fault that you are too narrow-minded to accept that other people have different political priorities.
All I have done is set out what I think the EU27’s reasoning is. I don’t personally think no deal would be catastrophic economically (damaging and catastrophic not being synonyms), and I think it could kill pro-European sentiment in this country for a generation.
"Material considerations" – AKA people's jobs and livelihoods. Your pathetic euphemisms are disgusting.
Re holidays in the UK - very few places are as beautiful as the Duddon valley in the western Lake District. The drive over the fells into Broughton and Millom with the estuary in the far distance is glorious as is the drive from Ulverston to Millom with on the right Coniston water glinting in the distance. And the views from Black Combe .......
Anyway, I suppose I’d better go shopping for beans and lentils today .......
I'm told dried lentils and canned goods last the longest.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Actually, I'm still amazed the EU didn't simply tell us to piss off.
Might we have done better with Boris as PM? Even if we'd ended up in the same place, he'd be in a stronger position to sell this Chequers deal to the Tory faithful.
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Might we have done better with Boris as PM? Even if we'd ended up in the same place, he'd be in a stronger position to sell this Chequers deal to the Tory faithful.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I don't think they are determined to have a 'terrible' Brexit. Quite simply they have one member state the Republic of Ireland who are demanding no hard border in Ireland. That means they will not agree to NI leaving the customs union. Simple as. I would have expected them to negotiate on that because it is the request of one small state and doesn't threaten the integrity of the EU. Given Britain has given way on everything else - not surprising since we seemed to have delusions of having plus eating cake - they'll probably expect the same with this. And didn't May commit to no hard border in her backstop? (I forget amidst all this business).
Do you think they should take into account what their negotiating position wich mean for its remaining member states? Do you really think that Spain will be pleased with a Hard Brexit?
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I don't think they are determined to have a 'terrible' Brexit. Quite simply they have one member state the Republic of Ireland who are demanding no hard border in Ireland. That means they will not agree to NI leaving the customs union. Simple as. I would have expected them to negotiate on that because it is the request of one small state and doesn't threaten the integrity of the EU. Given Britain has given way on everything else - not surprising since we seemed to have delusions of having plus eating cake - they'll probably expect the same with this. And didn't May commit to no hard border in her backstop? (I forget amidst all this business).
She has committed to no hard border many times. It prefaces just about anything she says on the whole Brexit process.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Actually, I'm still amazed the EU didn't simply tell us to piss off.
I wish they had, it would have forced the government into serious WTO exit planning.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Actually, I'm still amazed the EU didn't simply tell us to piss off.
I wish they had, it would have forced the government into serious WTO exit planning.
Why they didn't plan for this at all is utterly risible. They are completely useless.
Might we have done better with Boris as PM? Even if we'd ended up in the same place, he'd be in a stronger position to sell this Chequers deal to the Tory faithful.
I would rather have had Andrea Leadsom, and people know that I'm hardly her #1 fan. Anyway, must dash - time to polish my Spitfire.
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Actually, I'm still amazed the EU didn't simply tell us to piss off.
They could have. But we are constantly being told that they are a rules-based organisation and we can’t pick and choose which rules to follow etc. True. The same though also applies to the EU. Article 50 imposes a legal obligation on the EU which they have ignored.
Bluntly the EU is not averse to cherry picking if it feels it has the power to do so. It does in this case. So less of the canting wailing about how they are only following rules, please.
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
No, but it begs the question as to why we are bothering with that stuff.
Bluntly the EU is not averse to cherry picking if it feels it has the power to do so. It does in this case. So less of the canting wailing about how they are only following rules, please.
The EU have been trying to negotiate, but it's difficult to negotiate when your counterparty, sixteen months in, still hasn't made their opening position clear.
“High-harm” violent offences involving weapons continue to rise, official figures have revealed, as knife and gun crime, as well as homicide, increase in England and Wales.
Offences involving knives or sharp instruments went up by 16% to 40,147, according to police-recorded crimes for the year to March published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
The total number of homicides – murder and manslaughter – rose 12% by 74 to 701 in the period, when stripping out exceptional incidents with multiple victims such as the terrorist attacks in London and Manchester.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Actually, I'm still amazed the EU didn't simply tell us to piss off.
They could have. But we are constantly being told that they are a rules-based organisation and we can’t pick and choose which rules to follow etc. True. The same though also applies to the EU. Article 50 imposes a legal obligation on the EU which they have ignored.
Bluntly the EU is not averse to cherry picking if it feels it has the power to do so. It does in this case. So less of the canting wailing about how they are only following rules, please.
Surely
1) No Third Country can be a member of Eurotom; and 2) The EU must have regard for departing Members
are completely different yet are both rules (no idea if they are actual rules, just used for illustration).
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU negotiators simply do not care, they cannot risk anything other than a terrible Brexit as it may encourage other countries to leave. That is there negotiating position and it will not change
I don't think they are determined to have a 'terrible' Brexit. Quite simply they have one member state the Republic of Ireland who are demanding no hard border in Ireland. That means they will not agree to NI leaving the customs union. Simple as. I would have expected them to negotiate on that because it is the request of one small state and doesn't threaten the integrity of the EU. Given Britain has given way on everything else - not surprising since we seemed to have delusions of having plus eating cake - they'll probably expect the same with this. And didn't May commit to no hard border in her backstop? (I forget amidst all this business).
Do you think they should take into account what their negotiating position wich mean for its remaining member states? Do you really think that Spain will be pleased with a Hard Brexit?
That's for them to decide. If the 27 governments - who've been happy to take a backseat so far - decide to push Barnier I'm sure they will. He's only sticking to what the governments have given him. As NPXMP pointed out the EU wants to make a point that it isn't just about the big states. I question how much sympathy there really is for Ireland. It's done very nicely out of the EU and now flogs people off with corporate tax.
Bluntly the EU is not averse to cherry picking if it feels it has the power to do so. It does in this case. So less of the canting wailing about how they are only following rules, please.
The EU have been trying to negotiate, but it's difficult to negotiate when your counterparty, sixteen months in, still hasn't made their opening position clear.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Actually, I'm still amazed the EU didn't simply tell us to piss off.
Surely
1) No Third Country can be a member of Eurotom; and 2) The EU must have regard for departing Members
are completely different yet are both rules (no idea if they are actual rules, just used for illustration).
There should be an agency called Eurotom. Make it so Juncker.
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
No, but it begs the question as to why we are bothering with that stuff.
Because people could literally die if it isn’t sorted
1) No Third Country can be a member of Eurotom; and 2) The EU must have regard for departing Members
are completely different yet are both rules (no idea if they are actual rules, just used for illustration).
That looks about right, which, again, begs the question as to why the government hasn't been planning for rule one which applies to a whole host of EU agencies. The remainers in number 10 and 11 have been kidding themselves into thinking that the EU will bend the rules for us somehow, but the reality is that we will be a third country afterwards and they need to get that into their dense cranial regions as much as some of the leavers who thought that negotiating a complex trade deal with customs would be done within 18 months.
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
No, but it begs the question as to why we are bothering with that stuff.
Because people could literally die if it isn’t sorted
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
I have no idea and doubt it is relevant.
Yes it is, especially given your original comment.
The point being missed this morning is that no matter what the Govt proposes to the EU, the EU will not accept it unless it is exactly what the EU wants. There has been been no effective negotiation because the EU will not budge. May knows this now which is why she produced the White Paper and then let the ERG amend it as whatever she puts forward to the EU it will always be rejected. She can then blame the EU as she can say (with complete honesty) that she has done all that she can to achieve a deal, but the EU have not moved at all. I truly think the UK Government are amazed at the negotiating stance of the EU. Im not as all they are doing is protecting the institution of the EU. They do not care about individual countries, as shown with their treatment of Greece, that just need to EU project to continue. I am someone who voted remain, but if there was a referundum tomorrow I would vote leave. I hate the EU institution now.
The EU owes no duties to Britain in the leaving negotiation. I think the EU has viewed its own interest shortsightedly but it is entitled to form its own view of how to approach the negotiation. It turns out Britain doesn’t hold all the cards. When dealing with a stronger negotiating partner you have to expect to lose a lot. Why do you think the EU should budge if it thinks it can get what it wants by holding firm? (There are answers to that question but they don’t entail a duty of niceness on the EU’s part.)
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
They don’t have a duty of niceness, true. But Article 50 does impose on them a duty to take account of the future relationship with the departing member, something they have singularly failed to do.
Actually, I'm still amazed the EU didn't simply tell us to piss off.
Surely
1) No Third Country can be a member of Eurotom; and 2) The EU must have regard for departing Members
are completely different yet are both rules (no idea if they are actual rules, just used for illustration).
There should be an agency called Eurotom. Make it so Juncker.
Switzerland is a member of Euroatom.
Neither of these affect your point, of course.
I hate cats so I would instantly Brexit on that alone.
Bluntly the EU is not averse to cherry picking if it feels it has the power to do so. It does in this case. So less of the canting wailing about how they are only following rules, please.
The EU have been trying to negotiate, but it's difficult to negotiate when your counterparty, sixteen months in, still hasn't made their opening position clear.
Complete nonsense
Is it?
Chequers was effectively the UK's opening offer to the EU, the first time the UK government came close enough to not being in open warfare to propose something to the EU.
Sadly the Tories set fire to the damned thing before it got within a hundred miles of Brussels.
If you've ever watched the play This House you'll always have a soft spot for Walter Harrison, Bob Mellish, Michael Cocks, and the rest of the Labour whips from 1974 to 1979.
Michael Cocks was of course one among many Cocks elected to the House in the twentieth century.
If you've ever watched the play This House you'll always have a soft spot for Walter Harrison, Bob Mellish, Michael Cocks, and the rest of the Labour whips from 1974 to 1979.
Michael Cocks was of course one among many Cocks elected to the House in the twentieth century.
1) No Third Country can be a member of Eurotom; and 2) The EU must have regard for departing Members
are completely different yet are both rules (no idea if they are actual rules, just used for illustration).
That looks about right, which, again, begs the question as to why the government hasn't been planning for rule one which applies to a whole host of EU agencies. The remainers in number 10 and 11 have been kidding themselves into thinking that the EU will bend the rules for us somehow, but the reality is that we will be a third country afterwards and they need to get that into their dense cranial regions as much as some of the leavers who thought that negotiating a complex trade deal with customs would be done within 18 months.
Was chatting to a few finance types recently and they give October as the deadline before front office, EU-covering staff are relocated (kicking and screaming in most cases) to Yurp.
These are not name plate changes although in the scheme of things not a huge issue.
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
No, but it begs the question as to why we are bothering with that stuff.
Because people could literally die if it isn’t sorted
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
No, but it begs the question as to why we are bothering with that stuff.
Because people could literally die if it isn’t sorted
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
No, but it begs the question as to why we are bothering with that stuff.
Because people could literally die if it isn’t sorted
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have not the EU said that they are willing to negotiate and sign a free trade deal ? What we are asking for goes some way beyond that.
I am not pretending the EU have been particularly neighbourly or even reasonable, but your characterisation is just silly.
1) No Third Country can be a member of Eurotom; and 2) The EU must have regard for departing Members
are completely different yet are both rules (no idea if they are actual rules, just used for illustration).
That looks about right, which, again, begs the question as to why the government hasn't been planning for rule one which applies to a whole host of EU agencies. The remainers in number 10 and 11 have been kidding themselves into thinking that the EU will bend the rules for us somehow, but the reality is that we will be a third country afterwards and they need to get that into their dense cranial regions as much as some of the leavers who thought that negotiating a complex trade deal with customs would be done within 18 months.
Was chatting to a few finance types recently and they give October as the deadline before front office, EU-covering staff are relocated (kicking and screaming in most cases) to Yurp.
These are not name plate changes although in the scheme of things not a huge issue.
I've heard the figure dozens bandied about for a lot of companies.
The EU are signing a free trade deal with Japan, which amazingly doesn't involve freedom of movement or any of the other crap that they are insisting with us.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
Have Japan signed up to things like Euroatom?
I have no idea and doubt it is relevant.
Yes it is, especially given your original comment.
Well if you're not going to explain why then I can't really argue with you.
Comments
While Corbyn possibly backs Brexit, he doesn’t care that much. Unlike the Leavamentalists on the right, for him it’s a means not an end. His best route to power is to position himself as the grown up who will delay Brexit by withdrawing article 50 “so that we have time to undo the mess that the Tories have made by wasting the last 2 years” and then see what happens. It doesn’t really matter at that point whether his intention is to go through with Brexit in the fullness of time as he’s unlikely to be PM by the time a final decision has to be made.
I am genuinely surprised however at how sanguine they seem to be over no deal. For example, this aircraft business. I assumed they had quietly dropped it because they realised how damaging it could be. Suddenly hey have brought it back and are screaming and shouting about the damage to the UK. But if they take their current negotiating position to its logical conclusion, every flight in Europe - possibly every flight on the planet - will be grounded on March 30th, as any aircraft with British parts will lose its certificate of airworthiness - and between Airbus wings and Rolls-Royce engines, that's most of them.
Moreover, the large majority of their regulatory staff in this (as in The EMA) are British and they have already said they can't work for the EU after Brexit (which is ironic) leaving them both crippled. Similarly, if they kick us out of open skies, almost all flights from North America to Europe will have to cease as they can't cross British airspace.
That's even assuming they can find some way to replicate the functions of the City on the continent, which so far they have completely failed to do - if not, their banking systems look horribly vulnerable and could suffer a 2007 credit crunch event. A second such event would crash the Euro.
I am incidentally assuming that these will not happen because I would have thought even Juncker will sober up for long enough to seee what a disaster this would be, or perhaps Selmayr will take time away from excusing his grandfather's behaviour in Yugoslavia to tell him. But at the moment they seem almost as complacent as Jacob Rees-Mogg, and with considerably less reason.
Our problem was as you say that from the moment we triggered A50 we lost the initiative as effectively became a third country overnight with no say in anything.
The EU have bungled over these negotiations, and badly. They seem intent on looking like intransigent children denied a nice sweet. In this, however, they have been somewhat helped by Davis behaving in exactly the same way.
It would also help if the government had the first idea what it was actually trying to achieve.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/6808771/new-macbook-pro-2018-cpu-throttling-performance-clock-speed-overheating/
It stinks. Shows the level of panic in the Whips office. But if it stopped May feeling she had to call another general election if she lost (as per yesterday's Times), then ends and means and all that....
It's only Gove that you're feeling
It's only Gove doing its thing, baby
It's only Gove that you're giving
I am sorry, but it was up to us to come up the the plan outlining what relationship we wanted. Instead we have piddled around for two years telling the EU that we wanted to cherrypick when the one thing they told us we could not have was cherrypicking.
Nobody made Mrs May trigger A50. Plenty of people told her not to do so until the initial positions were worked out in detail. Instead she sent a courier to Brussels with no advance warning or publicity and the first we knew was a photo of Barnier being handed an envelope. Echoes of Brown skulking around the edges of the Lisbon Treaty there...
What are they supposed to have negotiated on? We only drew up our own position last month and we are still busy fiddling with it and mistranslating it into gibberish.
If you don't like Apple products nobody is forcing you to buy them. You seem slightly obsessed by Apple, Francis!
https://twitter.com/PeterHoskinsTV/status/1019862374931714048
https://www.abitleftandabitlost.com/posts/leo-varadkar-should-be-worried-on-brexit-after-the-last-two-weeks
All I have done is set out what I think the EU27’s reasoning is. I don’t personally think no deal would be catastrophic economically (damaging and catastrophic not being synonyms), and I think it could kill pro-European sentiment in this country for a generation.
In all seriousness though, apple do appear to have a QA problem for both their hardware and software, something that certainly wasn’t true in the past (at least not at the scale now, where ever iOS update has a problem and all their new hardware).
'We see the utter loss of shame among political leaders where they're caught in a lie and they just double down and they lie some more.'
This still astounds me to this very day.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3014903.stm
Er, when? I think you are again presenting your own opinion as fact.
There were occasions where he tried to persuade the Commons maintenance staff not to fix the door to a room the Tories used to meet in.
The entrance to the room had a history of getting stuck and Harrison was hoping that one day it might be useful in winning a vote if 40 Tory MPs were trapped in a room whilst the vote was going on.
Yes, this was an utterly disgusting episode and Lewis and the odious Leadsom should hang their heads in shame. One can only speculate as to what depths these people are prepared to plunge.
Perhaps the whole thing was an extended exercise in subtle trolling ?
Anyway, I suppose I’d better go shopping for beans and lentils today .......
Even if we'd ended up in the same place, he'd be in a stronger position to sell this Chequers deal to the Tory faithful.
They hate us and want to destroy us.
It's going to be really painful to leave thanks to the EU acting like it is, but thankfully we'll be out and can rebuild on our own terms.
That must be spoof post of the year.
To paraphrase
BorisWinston: some dog, some tail.They are completely useless.
Another day in Brexitland.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44881058
Bluntly the EU is not averse to cherry picking if it feels it has the power to do so. It does in this case. So less of the canting wailing about how they are only following rules, please.
Offences involving knives or sharp instruments went up by 16% to 40,147, according to police-recorded crimes for the year to March published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
The total number of homicides – murder and manslaughter – rose 12% by 74 to 701 in the period, when stripping out exceptional incidents with multiple victims such as the terrorist attacks in London and Manchester.
It didn't end well for UKIP.
https://twitter.com/ReplabJohn/status/1006786302283603968
1) No Third Country can be a member of Eurotom; and
2) The EU must have regard for departing Members
are completely different yet are both rules (no idea if they are actual rules, just used for illustration).
Switzerland is a member of Euroatom.
Neither of these affect your point, of course.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/health/brexit-cancer-deaths-more-patients-die-delays-euratom-leave-warning-a8070641.html?amp
But yes a bit careless of me there..
Chequers was effectively the UK's opening offer to the EU, the first time the UK government came close enough to not being in open warfare to propose something to the EU.
Sadly the Tories set fire to the damned thing before it got within a hundred miles of Brussels.
Or maybe it's just me.
These are not name plate changes although in the scheme of things not a huge issue.
Plus do we have the capability and resources to replicate Euratom. The experts have their doubts.
NEW THREAD
One wonders how the nation existed prior to the EU, given all of these things we are no longer going to be able to do after we leave.
What we are asking for goes some way beyond that.
I am not pretending the EU have been particularly neighbourly or even reasonable, but your characterisation is just silly.