The differences between Major, Brown and Blair, and maybe Cameron too, are all margin of error stuff. Are we making too much of this?
It would be of far more interest if the list of candidates had been compiled by someone with an imagination. I for one would be fascinated to know whom the public would choose when offered, for example, a selection of either Theresa May or...
Danny Dyer Gary Lineker Princess Meghan Susie Dent off Countdown The winners of Love Island, to rule jointly for a year in the manner of Roman consuls A military coup, with Parliament to be bombed to rubble by the RAF
No sense of fun these YouGov people.
If anyone can sort Brexit out, my money's on Susie Dent.
Mrs May's creation is to get her party accustomed to the principle of needing to remain in a customs arrangement with the EU. When (if) it's done it's job she can move on.
Eurotunnel is currently experiencing 4 hour delays. A 2 min delay means miles of queues. Also, Britain's JIT manufacturers will no doubt have sent the workforce home already.
Get prepared now the supermarkets will have no food tomorrow, panic buy now.
Or just keep chilling out and enjoy the weather.
How much of our imports come through the Chunnel?
Especially what percentage of our food imports come through there?
I have not seen an official statistic but I have seen a figure of 30% of our trade with the EU. The issues are is this figure just the chunnel or is the figure Dover ferries as well. But it is 30% of say 45% of our trade so 13.5%. with the above caveats.
May’s proposal to reintroduce fox hunting with a free vote was the single most viral topic of the 2017 election.
It's the moment everything started to go horribly wrong.
I thought it was the dementia tax proposal.
Double whammy. Foxhunting killed any lingering chances of the youth voting Tory (they like animals) and the dementia tax killed the middle aged from voting tory (we want/need granny's house thanks).
The young weren't considering it anyway (housing, Brexit, student fees etc). Foxing plays badly with older folks.
The differences between Major, Brown and Blair, and maybe Cameron too, are all margin of error stuff. Are we making too much of this?
It would be of far more interest if the list of candidates had been compiled by someone with an imagination. I for one would be fascinated to know whom the public would choose when offered, for example, a selection of either Theresa May or...
Danny Dyer Gary Lineker Princess Meghan Susie Dent off Countdown The winners of Love Island, to rule jointly for a year in the manner of Roman consuls A military coup, with Parliament to be bombed to rubble by the RAF
No sense of fun these YouGov people.
If anyone can sort Brexit out, my money's on Susie Dent.
If the challenge of Brexit is to rename all the existing structures in an innovative way to mask the underlying fact that nothing will change, she's your woman.
The differences between Major, Brown and Blair, and maybe Cameron too, are all margin of error stuff. Are we making too much of this?
It would be of far more interest if the list of candidates had been compiled by someone with an imagination. I for one would be fascinated to know whom the public would choose when offered, for example, a selection of either Theresa May or...
Danny Dyer Gary Lineker Princess Meghan Susie Dent off Countdown The winners of Love Island, to rule jointly for a year in the manner of Roman consuls A military coup, with Parliament to be bombed to rubble by the RAF
No sense of fun these YouGov people.
If anyone can sort Brexit out, my money's on Susie Dent.
Yes, Gentleman John probably deserved to lose in 1997, but did he really deserve the absolute political annihilation that was meted out to him? Was it the British public having one of its mad moments?
No, sadly the Tories deserved to lose heavily. They were intellectually exhausted after 18 years continuous government. At the time (although I disagreed with it) the Labour party seemed to have the ideas.
Perhaps it was because they had the time and space to develop them, whilst opposing a government tying itself up in internecine squabbles over Europe.
Thank goodness no governing party would be foolish enough to repeat the same mistake.
Mostly forgotten now, but at the time, Blair, Brown and Labour absolutely looked and sounded like a government in waiting. Years of preparation had gone into bomb-proofing policy, honing messages, laying the ground for the first months in office. The public had accepted the argument that the public realm had been left to rot and needed urgent attention. Compared to the tired, corrupted, split, Tories opposite, it was a no brainer.
And despite all that preparation, look at how little of real substance was actually attempted let alone achieved.
Absolutely, they were timid on almost every front, except perhaps Scots and Welsh devolution.
We'd be in a different place now if they had followed through on their promise to introduce fair votes.
And the world would be better off had the "ethical foreign policy" not died with Cook's resignation.
I tell you what, I don't think May's a very skilled politician in general but the way she's stitched Dom Raab and Sajid David up like a pair of badly smoked kippers this week has been beautiful.
The differences between Major, Brown and Blair, and maybe Cameron too, are all margin of error stuff. Are we making too much of this?
It would be of far more interest if the list of candidates had been compiled by someone with an imagination. I for one would be fascinated to know whom the public would choose when offered, for example, a selection of either Theresa May or...
Danny Dyer Gary Lineker Princess Meghan Susie Dent off Countdown The winners of Love Island, to rule jointly for a year in the manner of Roman consuls A military coup, with Parliament to be bombed to rubble by the RAF
No sense of fun these YouGov people.
If anyone can sort Brexit out, my money's on Susie Dent.
Susie’s brilliant, and if anyone hasn’t seen it the late-night version of Countdown (with everyone except Susie and Rachel replaced by comedians) is one of the funniest shows on TV.
Yes, Gentleman John probably deserved to lose in 1997, but did he really deserve the absolute political annihilation that was meted out to him? Was it the British public having one of its mad moments?
No, sadly the Tories deserved to lose heavily. They were intellectually exhausted after 18 years continuous government. At the time (although I disagreed with it) the Labour party seemed to have the ideas.
Perhaps it was because they had the time and space to develop them, whilst opposing a government tying itself up in internecine squabbles over Europe.
Thank goodness no governing party would be foolish enough to repeat the same mistake.
Mostly forgotten now, but at the time, Blair, Brown and Labour absolutely looked and sounded like a government in waiting. Years of preparation had gone into bomb-proofing policy, honing messages, laying the ground for the first months in office. The public had accepted the argument that the public realm had been left to rot and needed urgent attention. Compared to the tired, corrupted, split, Tories opposite, it was a no brainer.
And despite all that preparation, look at how little of real substance was actually attempted let alone achieved.
Absolutely, they were timid on almost every front, except perhaps Scots and Welsh devolution.
We'd be in a different place now if they had followed through on their promise to introduce fair votes.
And the world would be better off had the "ethical foreign policy" not died with Cook's resignation.
Labour was only mad keen on devolution because they thought they'd be able to rule Scotland and Wales forever.
I suspect this won't be the only local authority to need S114 intervention.
May's absurd splurge on the NHS completely misses the point - it's local councils which look after vulnerable children and especially the elderly and vulnerable adults. Where is the money for them or is it all going on the NHS ?
As an aside, public health is now the responsibility of local authorities, not the NHS so where is the funding to improve public health information?
"there are no matches in modern time for his three successive general election victories."
Maggie won three on the trot!
Please read what I wrote before attacking it. You've taken half a sentence with the qualification.
You "could of" wrote:
In electoral terms he is also the most successful Labour leader in history, and there are no matches in modern time for the three successive general election victories for his Party.
It is sublimely irrelevant anyway. Winning elections makes you a good election winner, it doesn't make you a good PM, or even a good party leader. Cameron's 2016 win was the worst thing to happen to the country, and the tory party, in my lifetime.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
Well quite. It's EEA+CU or No Deal, same as on day one. Whole negotiation process entirely worthless.
Were the EU always going to be unwavering, or did DD fail to persuade?
Barnier offered the UK government CETA and the government, rightly, rejected it as unworkable. I doubt anyone bothered to tell Davis though, why would they?
Well quite. It's EEA+CU or No Deal, same as on day one. Whole negotiation process entirely worthless.
Were the EU always going to be unwavering, or did DD fail to persuade?
Barnier offered the UK government CETA and the government, rightly, rejected it as unworkable. I doubt anyone bothered to tell Davis though, why would they?
This Select Committee hearing is hilarious in retrospect. At 9:58 Gove suggests that there's no need for a trade negotiation because we can just carry on as we are.
I suspect this won't be the only local authority to need S114 intervention.
May's absurd splurge on the NHS completely misses the point - it's local councils which look after vulnerable children and especially the elderly and vulnerable adults. Where is the money for them or is it all going on the NHS ?
As an aside, public health is now the responsibility of local authorities, not the NHS so where is the funding to improve public health information?
Public Health money should be ring-fenced, and one of the many problems at Northants is that they have had to pay back £8m of public health money that they'd spent elsewhere. Councillors and senior officers both totally asleep and assuming that something would come up. Well it hasn't and every other authority in the country has planned and managed better than they have.
New chief exec starts next week and the Finance Director (151 officer) has already quit after only being in post for 7 months so zero stability at the top as well. Little blame that can be laid at his door, at least he's had the guts to declare (twice) the financial notice which previous postholders should have done. What a mess.
Well, given that he's managed both to piss-off the opponents of the death penalty AND make himself look like a complete wimp in front of the supporters within the space of about five minutes, then yes, I can't imagine it will do him very much good.
What a hapless, hopeless, helpless, useless bunch of Olympic gold medal-winning idiots our entire political class are. If the Palace of Westminster burnt down with the whole lot of them trapped inside there'd be an eruption of nationwide cheering audible from Australia.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Yes, Gentleman John probably deserved to lose in 1997, but did he really deserve the absolute political annihilation that was meted out to him? Was it the British public having one of its mad moments?
The Tories were very tired by '97. It's probably not much more complicated than that. I won't vote for them at the next GE for much the same reason. We'll have had twelve years; that's plenty. Seventeen would be unhealthy, Corbyn notwithstanding.
*edit* Johnny can't count. Bad Johnny.
It's a fair point. Change for changes sake is not good, but 12 years would a good run. It depends if they get a 97 result at the end or a reasonable defeat.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
No deal it is. And the blame for any economic damage will be heaped on the EU.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
And we can be sure that any TA with Trump will make the downsides of TTIP look like small beer
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
May’s proposal to reintroduce fox hunting with a free vote was the single most viral topic of the 2017 election.
It's the moment everything started to go horribly wrong.
Was that before the Tory manifesto ?
I agree with you,the day it came out I put my head in my hands.
A bad manifesto can be papered over with a good campaign. See, for example, Jeremy Corbyn.
I disagree re the Labour manifesto - it was much better than I expected and very nearly led me to vote for them.
My recollection is the tory manifesto was stolid but actually contained some bold admissions - the dementia tax for one - the labour one was unfocused and cluttered - an inquiry into amritsar for instance - but standard opposition fare. The ld one had good presentation but was confused - half about replacing labour as main opposition and half imagining a ld government.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
They should be selling tickets to watch Barnier, Junker and Varakdar trying to build a border across Ireland. It’s going to be very amusing to see them try.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
A CETA-style deal doesn't have a majority in parliament because of the two reasons I just stated. It would also mean a very long implementation period, so if you want Brexit to be over with it's one of the worst approaches you could choose.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
They should be selling tickets to watch Barnier, Junker and Varakdar trying to build a border across Ireland. It’s going to be very amusing to see them try.
People will be too busy queuing for front row seats to watch parliament trying to pass legislation that would necessitate one.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
And we can be sure that any TA with Trump will make the downsides of TTIP look like small beer
We run a decent trade surplus with the US just based on the old GATT accords.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
A CETA-style deal doesn't have a majority in parliament because of the two reasons I just stated. It would also mean a very long implementation period, so if you want Brexit to be over with it's one of the worst approaches you could choose.
I have no objections to a long implementation period.
I do too, but his time has gone and given the direction the party seems likely to go post May, not coming again.
I was about to repeat my old story about the voter who complained to the TV interviewer that every Prime Minister in her lifetime had been worse than the last, but sometimes I'm not so sure.
David Cameron didn't have to pledge to hold an EU referendum. He did it entirely as a political stunt to try to deal with splits on the Right, despite the fact that he appeared genuinely personally convinced that a Leave outcome would be catastrophic. The decision was therefore made flat contrary to what he believed was in the best interest of the country. He then compounded the sin by refusing to let any preparations of any kind be made for a Leave outcome, and ran away and left May to clean up his shit when he didn't get what he wanted (incidentally, she may well be almost useless, but who left her in the Home Office for seven years and in pole position to succeed to the leadership in the first place?)
I therefore remain to be convinced that he's a figure to be remembered with a sense of dewy-eyed nostalgia.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
And we can be sure that any TA with Trump will make the downsides of TTIP look like small beer
We run a decent trade surplus with the US just based on the old GATT accords.
I’ve never been a ‘let’s have a US FTA-er’. Never seen the point, frankly.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
A CETA-style deal doesn't have a majority in parliament because of the two reasons I just stated. It would also mean a very long implementation period, so if you want Brexit to be over with it's one of the worst approaches you could choose.
Brexit over with? Whatever else would we talk about? Let it never end.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
No deal it is. And the blame for any economic damage will be heaped on the EU.
I'm more concerned by damage rather than who is blamed. The no dealers hope that will happen, and it might, for a bit. The negotiation phase been pointless though, and in fairness largely our fault for not even coming up with a position to be shot down until now.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
A CETA-style deal doesn't have a majority in parliament because of the two reasons I just stated. It would also mean a very long implementation period, so if you want Brexit to be over with it's one of the worst approaches you could choose.
I have no objections to a long implementation period.
Do you have any objections to a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, or do you agree with Tim Stanley that we should accept the idea?
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
When you have a PM who’s content to be blamed for trashing the nation’s economy, swiftly followed by the death of her party.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
And we can be sure that any TA with Trump will make the downsides of TTIP look like small beer
We run a decent trade surplus with the US just based on the old GATT accords.
I’ve never been a ‘let’s have a US FTA-er’. Never seen the point, frankly.
Someone will jump down my throat I'm sure, but if you think about it, the UK moving from seamless trade to WTO rules will, according to the IMF, reduce economic growth from ~24% to ~20% by 2030, which is around 1/3% p.a. Now, that's not inconsiderable in absolute terms, but it's a surprisingly small number, given the EU are our major & closest trading partners.
David Cameron didn't have to pledge to hold an EU referendum. He did it entirely as a political stunt to try to deal with splits on the Right, despite the fact that he appeared genuinely personally convinced that a Leave outcome would be catastrophic. The decision was therefore made flat contrary to what he believed was in the best interest of the country. He then compounded the sin by refusing to let any preparations of any kind be made for a Leave outcome, and ran away and left May to clean up his shit when he didn't get what he wanted
Cameron also invited a former deputy leader of UKIP to rejoin the party as an MEP, whereas May has blocked ex-Kippers.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
When you have a PM who’s content to be blamed for trashing the nation’s economy, swiftly followed by the death of her party.
Simples.
I doubt May is content about anything. She wants a deal, that is clear. There is just no majority for any deal variant that is available. She at least is trying to get a deal, unlike no dealers and those remainers who think no deal will speed up rejoining.
But it is clear she couldn't get a deal through no matter it's type - and certainly not Chequers - so there's no point wasting the summer pretending she can. A fudged deal later won't get through parliament either, so last minute deals are off.
May’s proposal to reintroduce fox hunting with a free vote was the single most viral topic of the 2017 election.
It's the moment everything started to go horribly wrong.
I thought it was the dementia tax proposal.
Double whammy. Foxhunting killed any lingering chances of the youth voting Tory (they like animals) and the dementia tax killed the middle aged from voting tory (we want/need granny's house thanks).
The main lesson for politicians is not to be honest during an election campaign in future. May was honest on everything and did badly.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
And we can be sure that any TA with Trump will make the downsides of TTIP look like small beer
We run a decent trade surplus with the US just based on the old GATT accords.
I’ve never been a ‘let’s have a US FTA-er’. Never seen the point, frankly.
Someone will jump down my throat I'm sure, but if you think about it, the UK moving from seamless trade to WTO rules will, according to the IMF, reduce economic growth from ~24% to ~20% by 2030, which is around 1/3% p.a. Now, that's not inconsiderable in absolute terms, but it's a surprisingly small number, given the EU are our major & closest trading partners.
Yes and it was the same with the Treasury forecast. George Osborne gave it the big doomsday speech but the report said the same. The economy would grow nicely and create lots of jobs but would be around 8% smaller than status quo, or 27% growth not 34% over the 14 year period.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
And we can be sure that any TA with Trump will make the downsides of TTIP look like small beer
We run a decent trade surplus with the US just based on the old GATT accords.
I’ve never been a ‘let’s have a US FTA-er’. Never seen the point, frankly.
Someone will jump down my throat I'm sure, but if you think about it, the UK moving from seamless trade to WTO rules will, according to the IMF, reduce economic growth from ~24% to ~20% by 2030, which is around 1/3% p.a. Now, that's not inconsiderable in absolute terms, but it's a surprisingly small number, given the EU are our major & closest trading partners.
Absolutely. the Project Fear claims were overblown; so the electorate called bull. It’s why the ‘end is nigh’ Remainers are not gaining traction or changing the views of legislators.
Well quite. It's EEA+CU or No Deal, same as on day one. Whole negotiation process entirely worthless.
Were the EU always going to be unwavering, or did DD fail to persuade?
Barnier offered the UK government CETA and the government, rightly, rejected it as unworkable. I doubt anyone bothered to tell Davis though, why would they?
Every Brexit option is unworkable, but ultimately something has to be made to "work". Which, despite everything, is what makes Brexit fascinating.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
When you have a PM who’s content to be blamed for trashing the nation’s economy, swiftly followed by the death of her party.
Simples.
I doubt May is content about anything. She wants a deal, that is clear. There is just no majority for any deal variant that is available. She at least is trying to get a deal, unlike no dealers and those remainers who think no deal will speed up rejoining.
But it is clear she couldn't get a deal through no matter it's type - and certainly not Chequers - so there's no point wasting the summer pretending she can. A fudged deal later won't get through parliament either, so last minute deals are off.
It will all depend on what the alternative option (and its consequences) might be, when the moment of truth finally arrives.
May’s proposal to reintroduce fox hunting with a free vote was the single most viral topic of the 2017 election.
It's the moment everything started to go horribly wrong.
I thought it was the dementia tax proposal.
Double whammy. Foxhunting killed any lingering chances of the youth voting Tory (they like animals) and the dementia tax killed the middle aged from voting tory (we want/need granny's house thanks).
The main lesson for politicians is not to be honest during an election campaign in future. May was honest on everything and did badly.
That wasn't the only reason - running scared of debating was a bad look - but we're unlikely to get such proposals again. The kind of proposals nly made when you think it's in the bag.
Good news, that was the silliest and most unworkable bit of the Chequers proposal.
At least Barnier is talking rather than clock-watching, let’s work out what the deal looks like and get on with it.
Customs union it is.
Why would we want to technically leave the EU only to tie ourselves up in its trade policy?
Because it is in our best interests. We keep frictionless trade with the EU, inherit all the EU FTAs with third countries such as Japan and Canada and continue to trade as now with USA and China. The fixation with an FTA with the US is driven by blind ideology.
And we can be sure that any TA with Trump will make the downsides of TTIP look like small beer
We run a decent trade surplus with the US just based on the old GATT accords.
I’ve never been a ‘let’s have a US FTA-er’. Never seen the point, frankly.
Someone will jump down my throat I'm sure, but if you think about it, the UK moving from seamless trade to WTO rules will, according to the IMF, reduce economic growth from ~24% to ~20% by 2030, which is around 1/3% p.a. Now, that's not inconsiderable in absolute terms, but it's a surprisingly small number, given the EU are our major & closest trading partners.
Absolutely. the Project Fear claims were overblown; so the electorate called bull. It’s why the ‘end is nigh’ Remainers are not gaining traction or changing the views of legislators.
The economy is remarkably resilient. Good old UK!
The claim that No Deal logistical chaos is Project Fear rests on believing that France would not apply the law at its borders in order to bail us out. Is that really a credible thing to pin your hopes on?
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
A CETA-style deal doesn't have a majority in parliament because of the two reasons I just stated. It would also mean a very long implementation period, so if you want Brexit to be over with it's one of the worst approaches you could choose.
I have no objections to a long implementation period.
Do you have any objections to a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, or do you agree with Tim Stanley that we should accept the idea?
I think there will be a customs border between NI and RoI; but I think it can be managed (via transition, laws and technology) in such a way as to have a very light footprint.
Diageo boss on Sky now. We will take Brexit in our stride, the much bigger issue to us is the UK Govt raising taxes on alcohol. But, but Diageo lorries cross the Irish/NI border multiple times.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
A CETA-style deal doesn't have a majority in parliament because of the two reasons I just stated. It would also mean a very long implementation period, so if you want Brexit to be over with it's one of the worst approaches you could choose.
I have no objections to a long implementation period.
Do you have any objections to a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, or do you agree with Tim Stanley that we should accept the idea?
I think there will be a customs border; but I think it can be managed (via transition, laws and technology) in such a way as to have a very light footprint.
At least on the UK side...
I said between NI and *GB*. For CETA it would have to be an internal UK border.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
No deal it is. And the blame for any economic damage will be heaped on the EU.
Yep, any minute now the public will all decide that it's completely the EU's fault that we've spent two years proposing things that break their red lines and they haven't yet changed their minds.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
When you have a PM who’s content to be blamed for trashing the nation’s economy, swiftly followed by the death of her party.
Simples.
I doubt May is content about anything. She wants a deal, that is clear. There is just no majority for any deal variant that is available. She at least is trying to get a deal, unlike no dealers and those remainers who think no deal will speed up rejoining.
But it is clear she couldn't get a deal through no matter it's type - and certainly not Chequers - so there's no point wasting the summer pretending she can. A fudged deal later won't get through parliament either, so last minute deals are off.
It will all depend on what the alternative option (and its consequences) might be, when the moment of truth finally arrives.
Problem is even most of the initial consequences won't be immediate to any non deal. The numbers and politics at play mean as a result they cannot agree on any deal.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
Why would you prefer no deal to CETA.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
A CETA-style deal doesn't have a majority in parliament because of the two reasons I just stated. It would also mean a very long implementation period, so if you want Brexit to be over with it's one of the worst approaches you could choose.
I have no objections to a long implementation period.
Do you have any objections to a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, or do you agree with Tim Stanley that we should accept the idea?
I think there will be a customs border; but I think it can be managed (via transition, laws and technology) in such a way as to have a very light footprint.
At least on the UK side...
I said between NI and *GB*. For CETA it would have to be an internal UK border.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
They should be selling tickets to watch Barnier, Junker and Varakdar trying to build a border across Ireland. It’s going to be very amusing to see them try.
People will be too busy queuing for front row seats to watch parliament trying to pass legislation that would necessitate one.
Except that:
1. The legislation required for the UK to leave the EU has already been passed.
2. The UK and the EU have very different ideas of what constitutes a border. We don’t really care what passes North, how efficient the technology is at collecting tarrifs or checking goods for compliance with standards.
Yep, any minute now the public will all decide that it's completely the EU's fault that we've spent two years proposing things that break their red lines and they haven't yet changed their minds.
Noted elsewhere, the same people who tour the airwaves shouting about "reclaiming control of our laws, money and borders" are the same one incensed when the EU suggest they might want to do likewise
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
They should be selling tickets to watch Barnier, Junker and Varakdar trying to build a border across Ireland. It’s going to be very amusing to see them try.
People will be too busy queuing for front row seats to watch parliament trying to pass legislation that would necessitate one.
Except that:
1. The legislation required for the UK to leave the EU has already been passed.
2. The UK and the EU have very different ideas of what constitutes a border. We don’t really care what passes North, how efficient the technology is at collecting tarrifs or checking goods for compliance with standards.
And what does that legislation say about the Irish border?
Yep, any minute now the public will all decide that it's completely the EU's fault that we've spent two years proposing things that break their red lines and they haven't yet changed their minds.
Noted elsewhere, the same people who tour the airwaves shouting about "reclaiming control of our laws, money and borders" are the same one incensed when the EU suggest they might want to do likewise
Why does soon to be foreign power want to control our laws, borders and money?
Robert Walters CEO on Sky. Asked about Brexit and is he seeing any impacts. The answer was if your in London, settled, kids in School. Do you really want to move to Frankfurt, I do not think so. He is seeing no brexodus now or planned.
The main lesson for politicians is not to be honest during an election campaign in future. May was honest on everything and did badly.
The Leave campaign lied and cheated, and won!
While Remain lied and cheated, and lost!
Did you assure anyone outside this forum that the EMA would be unaffected by Brexit? I hope you've managed to salvage the damage to your personal brand from this rookie mistake.
May’s proposal to reintroduce fox hunting with a free vote was the single most viral topic of the 2017 election.
It's the moment everything started to go horribly wrong.
I thought it was the dementia tax proposal.
Double whammy. Foxhunting killed any lingering chances of the youth voting Tory (they like animals) and the dementia tax killed the middle aged from voting tory (we want/need granny's house thanks).
The main lesson for politicians is not to be honest during an election campaign in future. May was honest on everything and did badly.
It wasn't honesty that drove May. The manifesto was a blank cheque she wrote herself.
Well, given that he's managed both to piss-off the opponents of the death penalty AND make himself look like a complete wimp in front of the supporters within the space of about five minutes, then yes, I can't imagine it will do him very much good.
What a hapless, hopeless, helpless, useless bunch of Olympic gold medal-winning idiots our entire political class are. If the Palace of Westminster burnt down with the whole lot of them trapped inside there'd be an eruption of nationwide cheering audible from Australia.
Actually that's an interesting point. If it was like a house fire, which MPs would PB'ers rush into the flames to pull out of the building? EDIT: And why?
It's good expectation management, you must admit. If we pull out with no deal but we don't run out of Camembert, the Government will say it's better than expected...
Well quite. It's EEA+CU or No Deal, same as on day one. Whole negotiation process entirely worthless.
Were the EU always going to be unwavering, or did DD fail to persuade?
Barnier offered the UK government CETA and the government, rightly, rejected it as unworkable. I doubt anyone bothered to tell Davis though, why would they?
Every Brexit option is unworkable, but ultimately something has to be made to "work". Which, despite everything, is what makes Brexit fascinating.
I think to comply with EFTA/EEA terms it must be SM plus *a* CU. It can't be SM plus *the* CU.
It can't be exactly Norway. That would screw the RoI.
If for some other reason it can't be SM plus a CU, then something will blow up.
I hope everyone's coping with the hot weather okay. It must be like a sauna in a lot of places around the country.
Just keep drinking LOTS of water everybody. Kidney stones can form very quickly and renal colic, as they pass through, is the nearest guys will experience to the pain of childbirth.
I hope everyone's coping with the hot weather okay. It must be like a sauna in a lot of places around the country.
I just spent six hours outside at a castle with two four-year olds, a baby, and three other adults. We slopped on lots of suncream so none of us got burnt, but we're all absolutely frazzled. I must have drunk four litres of water.
It was great fun, though. Especially the catapult that threw water balloons at people. for some reason people were trying to get hit rather than avoid them.
It's good expectation management, you must admit. If we pull out with no deal but we don't run out of Camembert, the Government will say it's better than expected...
Robert Walters CEO on Sky. Asked about Brexit and is he seeing any impacts. The answer was if your in London, settled, kids in School. Do you really want to move to Frankfurt, I do not think so. He is seeing no brexodus now or planned.
Meaning: if you're in London, settled, kids in school, and the paychecks keep coming in, Do you really want to move to Frankfurt? You'd hope the CEO of a recruitment company would not overlook that point.
It's good expectation management, you must admit. If we pull out with no deal but we don't run out of Camembert, the Government will say it's better than expected...
Over-rated in my view. What's wrong with Brie?
It's not as good as the Shire, it's got Big People living in it.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
They should be selling tickets to watch Barnier, Junker and Varakdar trying to build a border across Ireland. It’s going to be very amusing to see them try.
People will be too busy queuing for front row seats to watch parliament trying to pass legislation that would necessitate one.
Except that:
1. The legislation required for the UK to leave the EU has already been passed.
2. The UK and the EU have very different ideas of what constitutes a border. We don’t really care what passes North, how efficient the technology is at collecting tarrifs or checking goods for compliance with standards.
A customs border would be a requirement of WTO membership, no? However it's perfectly obvious that the EU likes a degree of protection and I've always found the 'we want control of our borders but not in Ireland' argument strange.
I hope everyone's coping with the hot weather okay. It must be like a sauna in a lot of places around the country.
It's bloody diabolical (and I think I may feel it even worse than most once I'm home, since I have the luxury of working in a facility with a good aircon system during the day.) Fortunately it looks like the worst of it will be over come Saturday morning. For now, anyway...
It's good expectation management, you must admit. If we pull out with no deal but we don't run out of Camembert, the Government will say it's better than expected...
Playing up the possibility of a disaster is also a high-stakes gamble for the Continuity Remain tendency. If the No Deal Apocalypse comes to pass, and it turns out to manifest as a temporary shortage of lettuces, then what's left of their credibility will evaporate.
Comments
I did warn him.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/26/home-office-suspends-cooperation-with-us-over-isis-pair-death-penalty-threat?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
We'd be in a different place now if they had followed through on their promise to introduce fair votes.
And the world would be better off had the "ethical foreign policy" not died with Cook's resignation.
EU climbing over themselves to give us a deal.
They need us more than we need them.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1022518184807735296
Oh, and she did this video.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=L77gk5QEZFo
Brexiteers were full of shit about how easy Brexit would be.
https://twitter.com/tseofpb/status/1002541345964216321?s=21
That worked out well.
https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2018/07/northamptonshire-issues-second-section-114-notice?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_term=
I suspect this won't be the only local authority to need S114 intervention.
May's absurd splurge on the NHS completely misses the point - it's local councils which look after vulnerable children and especially the elderly and vulnerable adults. Where is the money for them or is it all going on the NHS ?
As an aside, public health is now the responsibility of local authorities, not the NHS so where is the funding to improve public health information?
This Select Committee hearing is hilarious in retrospect. At 9:58 Gove suggests that there's no need for a trade negotiation because we can just carry on as we are.
Video here:
https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/5cb120f4-392c-4a67-a746-633e81653d19
New chief exec starts next week and the Finance Director (151 officer) has already quit after only being in post for 7 months so zero stability at the top as well. Little blame that can be laid at his door, at least he's had the guts to declare (twice) the financial notice which previous postholders should have done. What a mess.
What a hapless, hopeless, helpless, useless bunch of Olympic gold medal-winning idiots our entire political class are. If the Palace of Westminster burnt down with the whole lot of them trapped inside there'd be an eruption of nationwide cheering audible from Australia.
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
EEA and CU doesn’t have a majority in Parliament, as has been demonstrated many times.
It’s CETA or no deal. I know which I’d prefer.
David Cameron didn't have to pledge to hold an EU referendum. He did it entirely as a political stunt to try to deal with splits on the Right, despite the fact that he appeared genuinely personally convinced that a Leave outcome would be catastrophic. The decision was therefore made flat contrary to what he believed was in the best interest of the country. He then compounded the sin by refusing to let any preparations of any kind be made for a Leave outcome, and ran away and left May to clean up his shit when he didn't get what he wanted (incidentally, she may well be almost useless, but who left her in the Home Office for seven years and in pole position to succeed to the leadership in the first place?)
I therefore remain to be convinced that he's a figure to be remembered with a sense of dewy-eyed nostalgia.
Simples.
But it is clear she couldn't get a deal through no matter it's type - and certainly not Chequers - so there's no point wasting the summer pretending she can. A fudged deal later won't get through parliament either, so last minute deals are off.
The economy is remarkably resilient. Good old UK!
"Europe Elects
@europeelects
52m52 minutes ago
Germany, YouGov subsamples:
Best age group per party by %
CDU/CSU-EPP: 65+ • 39%
SPD-S&D: 65+ • 24%
AfD-EFDD: 25-44 • 23%
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 18-24 • 24%
LINKE-LEFT: 45-64 • 14%
FDP-ALDE: 18-24 • 14%"
At least on the UK side...
But, but Diageo lorries cross the Irish/NI border multiple times.
1. The legislation required for the UK to leave the EU has already been passed.
2. The UK and the EU have very different ideas of what constitutes a border. We don’t really care what passes North, how efficient the technology is at collecting tarrifs or checking goods for compliance with standards.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/section/10/enacted
NO, NOT THAT ONE !!!!!!!!
https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/1022538513705836544
It can't be exactly Norway. That would screw the RoI.
If for some other reason it can't be SM plus a CU, then something will blow up.
It was great fun, though. Especially the catapult that threw water balloons at people. for some reason people were trying to get hit rather than avoid them.