Sterling is pretty much where it was against the Euro in 2013 and higher than it was in 2008. But a declining currency is inevitable when we run an unsustainable trade deficit and our deficit with the rest of the EU is £80bn a year.
The way I read this question is am I willing to be blackmailed into doing something I really don't want to do by a bunch of largely retired Irish terrorists? The answer, of course, is hell no.
The logic behind the question is are you committed to achieving peace at any price, any price at all? The answer to that if people think logically about it is always going to be no.
Of course I want or Eire can't that is a matter for them but I suspect they will. If they choose not to and this upsets some ex IRA then that would be unfortunate but it sure isn't the basis on which we can determine our policy.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading it because Brexit has become a monomania with you. The vast majority just don't see it like that but that does not mean they are willing to be pushed around for the reasons I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It is the same point Alastair. People are not willing to be bullied. They (correctly) believe that such a scenario is unlikely but they are not willing to 't the percentages would surely be higher.
Why would a Labour voter in Scotland continue to back the Union in the face of an unelectable Labour party and a Conservative party entirely dominated by right wing English nationalists? That is where we are going, David.
Many Labour voters in Scotland voted Tory in 2017 to back the Union which is why the SNP lost over a third of their seats
No, they voted against the SNP. They did not vote for the English Nationalist party, which the Conservative party is now well down the path to becoming. Indeed, you expect an English nationalist to become the party’s next leader.
May in 2017 was presenting herself as Boudica of hard Brexit until she shifted last month to cave in Theresa so wrong on that too.
Indeed the yougov polling of Boris v Corbyn had the SNP vote unchanged, any movement there was in Scotland was some 2017 Tories back to Scottish Labour.
The way I read this question is am I willing to be blackmailed into doing something I really don't want to do by a bunch of largely retired Irish terrorists? The answer, of course, is hell no.
The logic behind the question is are you committed to achieving peace at any price, any price at all? The answer to that if people think logically about it is always going to be no.
Of course I want a solution to leaving that minimises the risk of terrorism once again starting up on these shores. I agree with the observations of @Richard_Nabavi on this. In a deal or no deal scenario we will continue to have different laws, different tax rates and different duties on either side of the border as we do today. If we don't enforce the border there will be some adverse tax implications, as there are today. We can live with that. If the EU or Eire can't that is a matter for them but I suspect they will. If they choose not to and this upsets some ex IRA then that would be unfortunate but it sure isn't the basis on which we can determine our policy.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading it because Brexit has become a monomania with you. The vast majority just don't see it like that but that does not mean they are willing to be pushed around for the reasons I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It can only be a good thing for Scotland, independence and back in EU is the likely outcome and it cannot come soon enough.
Given over a third of even SNP voters voted Leave there is no guarantee even an independent Scotland would rejoin the EU at most maybe the single market.
After all what is the logic of swapping London for Brussels? If devolution is not enough for you and you want full independence logically you go for the whole hog
Perhaps France (and by extension Belgium) has been seen differently through history north of the border?
Provocative piece, Antifrank, as no doubt intended and the usual suspects have decided to shoot from the hip in response. Ho hum.
From a non-Conservative perspective, the actions of the Government since June 2016 have been predicated less on securing a good deal for the citizens of the United Kingdom than trying to hold the Conservative Party together.
It may surprise some on here but the Conservative Party doesn't matter - the good governance of this country does. There are times when a Party has to do something that is incredibly unpopular (at least initially) but which said Party believes to be right.
Politics isn't just about quoting polls and desperately trying to be always on the side of public opinion - oh look, 52% believe in something so we'll believe in it. Politics is about the other 48% and governing for them too. Of course, among the 48% will be those who cannot accept they lost but I would contend the vast majority accept the result but naturally want a say in the future (you don't deny democracy forever to people who were on the wrong side of the argument once).
I appreciate the Conservatives are yoked to the Union - it's one of the primary pillars of their identity and their raison d'etre. I'm not - globalisation has challenged identities and in many ways forced us back into narrower and more comfortable confines. Ultimately, people like people like themselves and the disparity of nations challenges that.
Uncertainty challenges us all - in my lifetime the world has changed out of all recognition and it will continue so to do whether we are in the EU or not. Recognising and confronting these myriad challenges will be what marks out the successful mid-21st century political entity. Success in the past does not of course guarantee success in the future.
Now as the UK has a tourism deficit of over £20bn is it better to encourage more money to be spent in other countries or more money to be spent in this country ?
"Sorry, kids, we can't go to Spain this year. You will love Skegness though..."
The way I read this question is am I willing to be blackmailed into doing something I really don't want to do by a bunch of largely retired Irish terrorists? The answer, of course, is hell no.
The logic behind the question is are you committed to achieving peace at any price, any price at all? The answer to that if people think logically about it is always going to be no.
Of course I want a solution to leaving that minimises the risk of terrorism once again starting up on these shores. I agree with the observations of @Richard_Nabavi on this. In a deal or no deal scenario we will continue to have different laws, different tax rates and different duties on either side of the border as we do today. If we don't enforce the border there will be some adverse tax implications, as there are today. We can live with that. If the EU or Eire can't that is a matter for them but I suspect they will. If they choose not to and this upsets some ex IRA then that would be unfortunate but it sure isn't the basis on which we can determine our policy.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading it because Brexit has become a monomania with you. The vast majority just don't see it like that but that does not mean they are willing to be pushed around for the reasons I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It can only be a good thing for Scotland, independence and back in EU is the likely outcome and it cannot come soon enough.
Given over a third of even SNP voters voted Leave there is no guarantee even an independent Scotland would rejoin the EU at most maybe the single market.
After all what is the logic of swapping London for Brussels? If devolution is not enough for you and you want full independence logically you go for the whole hog
Perhaps France (and by extension Belgium) has been seen differently through history north of the border?
Scotland did not take half its laws from Paris even when independent
I have the greatest of respect for Alastair, but he's got this one wrong. Respondents to this poll were far from bonkers. The poll, once you look through its false dichotomy, is essentially asking voters whether a small bunch of violent criminals (or, in the alternative poll he quotes, a small region of the UK) should have a veto on a democratic decision taken by the population of the UK as a whole. Whether you voted Leave or Remain, of course the answer is clear: No. Who can disagree with that?
Agreed.
Really, the group of Leavers who might be regarded as acting irrationally are the DUP Leavers, who run the (relatively small, but probably growing) risk of ending up part of both the EU and Eire.
Not while they remain majorities in the two largest counties in Northern Ireland
Why this obsession with counties? As and when NI gets to decide, it'll be one overall vote for the province, just as Brexit has been.
The way I read this question is am I willing to be blackmailed into doing something I really don't want to do by a bunch of largely retired Irish terrorists? The answer, of course, is hell no.
The logic behind the question is are you committed to achieving peace at any price, any price at all? The answer to that if people think logically about it is always going to be no.
Of course I want or Eire can't that is a matter for them but I suspect they will. If they choose not to and this upsets some ex IRA then that would be unfortunate but it sure isn't the basis on which we can determine our policy.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading it because Brexit has become a monomania with you. The vast majority just don't see it like that but that does not mean they are willing to be pushed around for the reasons I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It is the same point Alastair. People are not willing to be bullied. They (correctly) believe that such a scenario is unlikely but they are not willing to 't the percentages would surely be higher.
Why would a Labour voter in Scotland continue to back the Union in the face of an unelectable Labour party and a Conservative party entirely dominated by right wing English nationalists? That is where we are going, David.
Many Labour voters in Scotland voted Tory in 2017 to back the Union which is why the SNP lost over a third of their seats
No, they voted against the SNP. They did not vote for the English Nationalist party, which the Conservative party is now well down the path to becoming. Indeed, you expect an English nationalist to become the party’s next leader.
May in 2017 was presenting herself as Boudica of hard Brexit until she shifted last month to cave in Theresa so wrong on that too.
Indeed the yougov polling of Boris v Corbyn had the SNP vote unchanged, any movement there was in Scotland was some 2017 Tories back to Scottish Labour.
I think it quite likely that Labour will support #peoplesvote at its conference.
In what way was 2016 NOT a #peoplesvote?
This is a new vote, now that everyone knows what the fuck it actually means to leave the EU.
We have no plan.
We are at the cliff edge.
We have the ree movement
I thought you'd already admitted that the mobility framework would be free movement in all but name?
I never said that, a mobility framework requires a job offer on arrival not ut name too
No. There’s no control of borders coming back from leaving the EU. That’s nothing to do with Brexit. It’s hard to know when we last exercised such control to prove we had it, but if British state ever did have control of borders and immigration that was lost long ago to globalisation.
Business dictates to government it can e of control. For that reason no British government will ever set up a little zone of control ever again. Staying in or leaving EU doesn’t change that fact in the slightest.
Container ships, internet, cheap labour resource abroad, Germans waiting with open arms for start ups, etc. From business perspective it’s fuck you government.
The only reason Leave got over 50% was the lack of transition controls by Blair in 2004 on free movement from the new accession countries unlike most EU nations which did impose them. With those transition controls Leave would likely have got no more than 45%. That has got nothing to do with what business wants specifically as had we imposed them properly we would have been doing exactly the same as the rest of the EU.
In any case you are also wrong as no country anywhere has open borders based on some sort of libertarian ultra big business globalisation plan. If it did the voters would throw the governing party out in 5 minutes for one imposing tighter controls
No I’m not wrong. Unfortunately. You described perfectly where we are, but you refuse to accept it. The promised control we can take back that makes a difference is not in the EU, globalisation has eaten it.
No you are wrong. We do not have global open border immigration or anything approaching it
Now as the UK has a tourism deficit of over £20bn is it better to encourage more money to be spent in other countries or more money to be spent in this country ?
"Sorry, kids, we can't go to Spain this year. You will love Skegness though..."
Its called living within your means.
During the last decade the UK has a cumulative current account deficit of over £700bn
Now as the UK has a tourism deficit of over £20bn is it better to encourage more money to be spent in other countries or more money to be spent in this country ?
"Sorry, kids, we can't go to Spain this year. You will love Skegness though..."
You dissing Skegness?
back to being bracing, as of this week
Thank goodness. I am not built for the weather we have had this summer. Sitting by a pool or even on the beach at Skegness it's fine. Working, getting around cities, living normal life, it's just too much.
I think it quite likely that Labour will support #peoplesvote at its conference.
.
We have no plan.
We.
t
I thought you'd already admitted that the mobility framework would be free movement in all but name?
I never said that, a mobility framework requires a job offer on arrival not ut name too
No. There’s no control of borders coming back from leaving the EU. That’s nothing to do with Brexit. It’s hard to know when we last exercised such control to prove we had it, but if British state ever did have control of borders and immigration that was lost long ago to globalisation.
Business dictates to government it can e of control. For that reason no British government will ever set up a little zone of control ever again. Staying in or leaving EU doesn’t change that fact in the slightest.
Container ships, internet, cheap labour resource abroad, Germans waiting with open arms for start ups, etc. From business perspective it’s fuck you government.
The only reason Leave got over 50% was the lack of transition controls by Blair in 2004 on free movement from the new accession countries unlike most EU nations which did impose them. With those transition controls Leave would likely have got no more than 45%. That has got nothing to do with what business wants specifically as had we imposed them properly we would have been doing exactly the same as the rest of the EU.
In any case you are also wrong as no country anywhere has open borders based on some sort of libertarian ultra big business globalisation plan. If it did the voters would throw the governing party out in 5 minutes for one imposing tighter controls
No I’m not wrong. Unfortunately. You described perfectly where we are, but you refuse to accept it. The promised control we can take back that makes a difference is not in the EU, globalisation has eaten it.
No you are wrong. We do not have global open border immigration or anything approaching it
One way or another we will still need all the EU workers, and just have to hope that they are still willing to come despite an unwelcoming climate and a depreciating currency.
I wasn’t expecting universal enthusiasm for the article. I was hoping that the actual argument might be engaged with. Two posters have offered up different versions of “they don’t really mean it”, despite this requiring radical reinterpretation of the formally asked questions and all the different polling evidence suggesting that they do.
It’s time to take this polling literally and consider what that means. The answer is not good.
Well I think it's partly down to the fact that as a population we have been relatively inoculated from the experience of war for some time. It would have been interesting to see a sub-sample for Northern Ireland leavers.
How would you expect Tory voters to choose between stopping Corbyn and peace in Northern Ireland?
Personally, I wouldn't sacrifice peace in Northern Ireland to get rid of Theresa May.
But if Corbyn won a democratic vote, and the UVF threatened a return to large scale violence if he were to get in ?
Yeah then I'd probably be saying we can't give in to terrorists.
There's no difference to this question in my opinion.
I can see a small difference, in that there are forms of Brexit which increase the risk of violence, and whilst we voted for Brexit, we did not vote for any particular type of Brexit. A parallel might be that Corbyn should not go forward with certain manifesto proposals if they increase the risk of violence. But I accept that the two scenarios are very similar and I can understand why for many Leavers they would answer in this way in a forced choice.
The way I read this question is am I willing to be blackmailed into doing something I really don't want to do by a bunch of largely retired Irish terrorists? The answer, of course, is hell no.
The logic behind the question is are you committed to achieving peace policy.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading ns I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It is the same point Alastair. People are not willing to be bullied. They (correctly) believe that such a scenario is unlikely but they are not willing to 't the percentages would surely be higher.
Why would a Labour voter in Scotland continue to back the Union in the face of an unelectable Labour party and a Conservative party entirely dominated by right wing English nationalists? That is where we are going, David.
Many Labour voters in Scotland voted Tory in 2017 to back the Union which is why the SNP lost over a third of their seats
No, they voted against the SNP. They did not vote for the English Nationalist party, which the Conservative party is now well down the path to becoming. Indeed, you expect an English nationalist to become the party’s next leader.
May in 2017 was presenting herself as Boudica of hard Brexit until she shifted last month to cave in Theresa so wrong on that too.
Indeed the yougov polling of Boris v Corbyn had the SNP vote unchanged, any movement there was in Scotland was some 2017 Tories back to Scottish Labour.
Plus of course Wales voted Leave
The SNP would love a referendum on Boris Johnson!
Yougov had a Tories under Boris on the same in Scotland as Cameron got in 2010 4 years before 55% of Scots voted for the Union with Scottish Labour close to 30% and the SNP unchanged.
Most Scottish domestic policy is now decided at Holyrood anyway not Westminster regardless of the UK PM it is the FM who decides Scottish domestic policy
It can only be a good thing for Scotland, independence and back in EU is the likely outcome and it cannot come soon enough.
I completely disagree with that Malcolm but if the majority of Scots think that way then that is our choice and it really isn't obvious why the English should abrogate their decision about membership of the EU to Scots. This is where Alastair is going wrong.
What Alastair forgets due to his own obsessions is that the English four years ago were prepared to let Scotland go their own way if that's what they wanted. We were reconciled to that already. We had agreed the choice on that was not to be ours.
Why should we now sacrifice our own decision making on everything going forwards on the EU or anything else just because the Scots are split on whether they want to remain with the English or not?
Agreed. It is his obsession with Brexit that leads to these absurd decisions. If Scots choose to leave that is their choice. If the Irish think it is a good idea to start blowing each other up again that would be their choice too. Ultimately people have to make their own choices. That is life.
If they lose their jobs no doubt that’s their decision too.
We had project fear, the promised punishment budget and the Treasury assuring us that there would be an immediate recession on the leave vote. And the majority voted to leave. That is what we know. In my opinion they did so because they, correctly, did not believe that risk would come to pass. And it didn't. Once again the same logic applies to the question in your thread header.
But it isn’t the same logic. It’s a ragbag of different reasons for sticking to your decision no matter what because you really really don’t want to change your mind.
No it isn't. Project fear is doubling down (having lost). We will not be able to fly, we will not be able to drive on the continent, we will have no medicine, we will all starve, all our financial service industries will leave, we will have mass unemployment, we will have war in Northern Ireland, no scare story is too ridiculous. People look at this nonsense and think, nah, don't think so. At the very margins they may be wrong in their assessment but it is a perfectly rational conclusion.
I have the greatest of respect for Alastair, but he's got this one wrong. Respondents to this poll were far from bonkers. The poll, once you look through its false dichotomy, is essentially asking voters whether a small bunch of violent criminals (or, in the alternative poll he quotes, a small region of the UK) should have a veto on a democratic decision taken by the population of the UK as a whole. Whether you voted Leave or Remain, of course the answer is clear: No. Who can disagree with that?
Agreed.
Really, the group of Leavers who might be regarded as acting irrationally are the DUP Leavers, who run the (relatively small, but probably growing) risk of ending up part of both the EU and Eire.
Not while they remain majorities in the two largest counties in Northern Ireland
Why this obsession with counties? As and when NI gets to decide, it'll be one overall vote for the province, just as Brexit has been.
Nope as NI was only created because of Protestants and the majority of NI people live in Protestant counties. The alternative is the inevitable return of loyalist paramilitaries. Religion and cultural identity is all in NI
That's weird. Tried signing in and it appeared not to work, then went to the Vanilla site and I'm in.
Anyway, I agree with Mr. Nabavi. You might as well ask if you approve of blasphemy laws or want more terrorism, and if you don't approve of making it illegal to draw a 7th century 'prophet' then you just don't care about Charlie Hebdo style massacres.
This argument wilfully ignores the point I explicitly make that a majority of English Leavers see Northern Ireland’s independence as an acceptable price to pay, ditto Scotland’s independence and ditto for a plurality they or a family member losing their jobs. It is baffling how reluctant so many posters are to engage with the crazed intensity of feeling on the Leave side.
Perhaps a less intemperate presentation of your argument would have been more persuasive? Any other reasonable arguments presented in apocalyptic fashion lost recently?
It’s up to posters to decide whether to read. Most evidently have preferred to be offended. I’m not running a campaign.
That's probably a good job too - look in a second EU ref I'd vote to remain most likely. Ceteris Paribus it's simply better for our prosperity to avoid as many barriers such as customs as possible. But please don't for the love of God lead the remain campaign or my fingers might end up slipping to leave xD.
I have no idea which way I would vote in a second referendum. Right now one would be a really bad idea.
Now as the UK has a tourism deficit of over £20bn is it better to encourage more money to be spent in other countries or more money to be spent in this country ?
"Sorry, kids, we can't go to Spain this year. You will love Skegness though..."
Its called living within your means.
During the last decade the UK has a cumulative current account deficit of over £700bn
And slightly more than 100% of that is with the EU through the SM. To put it in perspective that is equivalent to more than 30% of our entire GDP for a single year compared to a threatened 4% loss in GDP by 2030 (assuming we don't change our policies at all, act exactly as we would have within the EU, etc) from leaving.
I think it quite likely that Labour will support #peoplesvote at its conference.
.
We have no plan.
We.
t
I thought you'd already admitted that the mobility framework would be free movement in all but name?
I never said that, a mobility framework requires a job offer on arrival not ut name too
No. There’s no control of borders coming back from leaving the EU. That’s nothing to do with Brexit. It’s hard to know when we last exercised such control to prove bour resource abroad, Germans waiting with open arms for start ups, etc. From business perspective it’s fuck you government.
The only reason Leave got over 50% was the lack of transition controls by Blair in 2004 on free movement from the new accession countries unlike most U.
In any case you are also wrong as no country anywhere has open borders based on some sort of libertarian ultra big business globalisation plan. If it did the voters would throw the governing party out in 5 minutes for one imposing tighter controls
No I’m not wrong. Unfortunately. You described perfectly where we are, but you refuse to accept it. The promised control we can take back that makes a difference is not in the EU, globalisation has eaten it.
No you are wrong. We do not have global open border immigration or anything approaching it
One way or another we will still need all the EU workers, and just have to hope that they are still willing to come despite an unwelcoming climate and a depreciating currency.
From 2004 we took far more low skilled European migrants than there were jobs created for them lowering the wages of UK low skilled workers. It is high skilled jobs where the growth is and migration should be focused
It really isn’t looking good. Things are very unstable and there doesn’t seem to be anyone waiting in the wings. And there is a lot of anger and distrust about. We’re reaping the harvest of decades of negative politics.
That's weird. Tried signing in and it appeared not to work, then went to the Vanilla site and I'm in.
Anyway, I agree with Mr. Nabavi. You might as well ask if you approve of blasphemy laws or want more terrorism, and if you don't approve of making it illegal to draw a 7th century 'prophet' then you just don't care about Charlie Hebdo style massacres.
This argument wilfully ignores the point I explicitly make that a majority of English Leavers see Northern Ireland’s independence as an acceptable price to pay, ditto Scotland’s independence and ditto for a plurality they or a family member losing their jobs. It is baffling how reluctant so many posters are to engage with the crazed intensity of feeling on the Leave side.
There is an equally crazed intensity feeling for Remain/Reversal. Several hundred thousand on the streets of London waving EU flags is not a phenomenon that we saw before the referendum. The country is becoming even more divided in the two years since the referendum, and that is before anything has changed. If there is a single thing that people do not like, it is change.
While I have come round to a #peoplesvote to reverse Brexit, I do not see it as a simple solution. No doubt at all that the Brexiteers would be apoplectic. They might even come up with a form of Brexit more sophisticated than "We had do destroy the country in order to save it"
True, but the more fundamental point is that most people aren't crazed either way. There's a nice bell curved normal distribution of intensity of feeling on both sides of the vote. If you are calling people crazy for disagreeing with you really have already lost the argument.
There seem to be a few people on this thread calling Mr Meeks crazy...
It’s not the same point. It’s a question of priorities. Leavers prioritise Leaving above everything, the economy, the jobs of family and themselves, the state itself, peace.
I am at a loss as to why so many posters are determined to extensively rewrite polling responses to fit their own narrative when the literal meaning of the responses fits the facts far better.
Leaving was democratically chosen.
Swap the word Leave for democracy and tell me what you would be prepared to sacrifice democracy for? Should you value your own job more than democracy?
Getting a new job is easier than regaining democracy once lost.
Given that the same gammon voted in the previous referendum not to make our unrepresentative democracy even slightly more representative, I suspect you are flattering them by attributing to them a noble concern for “democracy”.
It’s not the same point. It’s a question of priorities. Leavers prioritise Leaving above everything, the economy, the jobs of family and themselves, the state itself, peace.
I am at a loss as to why so many posters are determined to extensively rewrite polling responses to fit their own narrative when the literal meaning of the responses fits the facts far better.
Leaving was democratically chosen.
Swap the word Leave for democracy and tell me what you would be prepared to sacrifice democracy for? Should you value your own job more than democracy?
Getting a new job is easier than regaining democracy once lost.
Given that the same gammon voted in the previous referendum not to make our unrepresentative democracy even slightly more representative, I suspect you are flattering them by attributing to them a noble concern for “democracy”.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading it because Brexit has become a monomania with you. The vast majority just don't see it like that but that does not mean they are willing to be pushed around for the reasons I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It can only be a good thing for Scotland, independence and back in EU is the likely outcome and it cannot come soon enough.
I completely disagree with that Malcolm but if the majority of Scots think that way then that is our choice and it really isn't obvious why the English should abrogate their decision about membership of the EU to Scots. This is where Alastair is going wrong.
What Alastair forgets due to his own obsessions is that the English four years ago were prepared to let Scotland go their own way if that's what they wanted. We were reconciled to that already. We had agreed the choice on that was not to be ours.
Why should we now sacrifice our own decision making on everything going forwards on the EU or anything else just because the Scots are split on whether they want to remain with the English or not?
Agreed. It is his obsession with Brexit that leads to these absurd decisions. If Scots choose to leave that is their choice. If the Irish think it is a good idea to start blowing each other up again that would be their choice too. Ultimately people have to make their own choices. That is life.
Just to throw some more petrol on a perfectly good fire
Boris's comments about the burka also suffer from not being accurate. My understanding (and I'm happy to be told I'm wrong) is the burka is the full veil covering even the face. I've seen them in the UK but in my part of London they are very rare.
The niqab has an opening for the eyes - they are more common but again far from universal. Then you have the hijab which is more than just the headscarf - I believe the word translates to a "modest attire" but it's widely practiced and allows for comfortable and easy-fitting clothing to be worn.
Beyond that you have the chador which is a single garment worn over the top of clothing which covers the head and arms but isn't as restricted as the niqab. That's seen as well.
So when people talk about the burka they really mean the niqab (with the eye slit). In London at any rate I rarely see the full burka.
The perception that women are "forced" to wear niqab or burka is one that is very short on evidence and very long on cultural perception. That there are some who are forced to wear it seems undeniable but as a general practice of compulsion I'm much less convinced. In my part of London (and I appreciate in more socially conservative communities this will differ) hijab is the most common form of attire.
As I said yesterday, there are other religions which prescribe what should be worn and when and by whom but there are particular cultural issues with niqab and burka.
Perhaps we should have a referendum on whether Mr Meeks should write any more headers about Brexit. I know how I’d vote.
I'd vote yes. He is a superb and witty writer, he is thought provoking and he is free! What's not to like? If we all agreed with every header this would be a much duller site.
It’s not the same point. It’s a question of priorities. Leavers prioritise Leaving above everything, the economy, the jobs of family and themselves, the state itself, peace.
I am at a loss as to why so many posters are determined to extensively rewrite polling responses to fit their own narrative when the literal meaning of the responses fits the facts far better.
Leaving was democratically chosen.
Swap the word Leave for democracy and tell me what you would be prepared to sacrifice democracy for? Should you value your own job more than democracy?
Getting a new job is easier than regaining democracy once lost.
Given that the same gammon voted in the previous referendum not to make our unrepresentative democracy even slightly more representative, I suspect you are flattering them by attributing to them a noble concern for “democracy”.
AV isn't proportional....
I know, which is why I wrote “slightly more representative” rather than “proportional”.
Mr RoyalBlue, you are, of course, free to set up your own blog. I don’t think OGH has ever claimed his site to be a democracy, though it would be worth it just for the fun we’d have arguing about the voting system to use.
I wonder if this sort of polling would have been done in Scotland had they voted for independence. Make no mistake, Scotland going independent would have been more divisive by an order of magnitude compared with Brexit.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading it because Brexit has become a monomania with you. The vast majority just don't see it like that but that does not mean they are willing to be pushed around for the reasons I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It can only be a good thing for Scotland, independence and back in EU is the likely outcome and it cannot come soon enough.
I completely disagree with that Malcolm but if the majority of Scots think that way then that is our choice and it really isn't obvious why the English should abrogate their decision about membership of the EU to Scots. This is where Alastair is going wrong.
What Alastair forgets due to his own obsessions is that the English four years ago were prepared to let Scotland go their own way if that's what they wanted. We were reconciled to that already. We had agreed the choice on that was not to be ours.
Why should we now sacrifice our own decision making on everything going forwards on the EU or anything else just because the Scots are split on whether they want to remain with the English or not?
Agreed. It is his obsession with Brexit that leads to these absurd decisions. If Scots choose to leave that is their choice. If the Irish think it is a good idea to start blowing each other up again that would be their choice too. Ultimately people have to make their own choices. That is life.
Interesting use of 'their'.
Hmm...The reason I think is that it would not be my choice, I would vote for the Union. But I take your point.
Perhaps we should have a referendum on whether Mr Meeks should write any more headers about Brexit. I know how I’d vote.
I'd vote yes. He is a superb and witty writer, he is thought provoking and he is free! What's not to like? If we all agreed with every header this would be a much duller site.
There is a strain of Brexiteer thinking which treats those who disagree in the manner of Gavin "shut up and go away" Williamson.
It really isn’t looking good. Things are very unstable and there doesn’t seem to be anyone waiting in the wings. And there is a lot of anger and distrust about. We’re reaping the harvest of decades of negative politics.
It will get worse before it gets better.
It does have the feel of 1780s France about it.
You can remember France in the 1780s?
The next Queen's Speech... "Après moi, le déluge".
I have no idea which way I would vote in a second referendum. Right now one would be a really bad idea.
Right now, we have nothing to vote on.
The problem has always been, as I'm sure you realise, that IF May turns up with an A50 Treaty, the chances are it won't please everybody (or possibly anybody).
In effect, we'd be back to Stage 1 (or a modified version) and you'd be confronted with the impossibility of a binary referendum with three options:
A) Accept the May Deal (for she is a goddess who can walk on water and through fire and is the greatest Conservative PM who has ever bestrode the planet (the Blessed Margaret excluded of course))
No, Out means Out. I can't accept this mealy-mouthed piece of Euro-surrendering fudge. I'm leaving and I don't care and Brussels can take their £39 billion and swivel.
C) Please, Please, Please, Please can we stay in - we'll do anything. We'll join Schengen, take the Euro and host Eurovision in perpetuity.
As you can imagine, it's a tough choice.
The only serious option would be in the event of NO Deal for May to call a General Election - May would stand on "I'm right, the Europeans are duplicitous bastards. Britain is wonderful". Corbyn would be all "what about the workers?" while Cable would be nudged awake and say "it's all been a terrible waste of time, effort and political careers. Let's just turn the clock back to 22/6/16 and carry on as if nothing had happened."
After all, even into the early 90s, the Conservatives claimed Labour would turn the clock back to 1979, turn the country back over to the Unions and force The Jam to re-form.
BBC Weather reckon it’s raining in London at the moment and could be until lunch, does that sound right? https://www.bbc.com/weather/0/2643743 Even if we lose a whole day over the match, we should still see a result so I’m laying the draw and backing India with a trading bet.
"There seem to be a few people on this thread calling Mr Meeks crazy..."
Mr Meeks isn't crazy. He's an enthusiastic Europhile who's angry about the result, but ultimately he's a realist. Much of his wilder rhetoric is tongue-in-cheek.
However, there are a few for whom Brexit is a red rag to a bull. They'd happily trade democracy for a reversal of the referendum. Once you polarise opinion, any compromises become a betrayal.
BBC Weather reckon it’s raining in London at the moment and could be until lunch, does that sound right? https://www.bbc.com/weather/0/2643743 Even if we lose a whole day over the match, we should still see a result so I’m laying the draw and backing India with a trading bet.
The forecast today looks really poor. That's disappointing. India really should have come a month earlier.
The way I read this question is am I willing to be blackmailed into doing something I really don't want to do by a bunch of largely retired Irish terrorists? The answer, of course, is hell no.
The logic behind the question is are you committed to achieving peace policy.
Again, you’re ignoring all the other polling I refer to that undermines your heavy rewriting of the poll responses. Their is no warrant for not treating this polling literally.
With respect, you are the one that is misreading it. You are misreading ns I have explained.
I have a clear and coherent explanation why a majority of English Leavers see Scottish independence as an acceptable price to pay for Brexit. Clearly it has nothing to do with Northern Irish terrorism. I await yours with interest.
It is the same point Alastair. People are not willing to be bullied. They (correctly) believe that such a scenario is unlikely but they are not willing to 't the percentages would surely be higher.
Why would a Labour voter in Scotland continue to back the Union in the face of an unelectable Labour party and a Conservative party entirely dominated by right wing English nationalists? That is where we are going, David.
Many Labour voters in Scotland voted Tory in 2017 to back the Union which is why the SNP lost over a third of their seats
No, they voted against the SNP. They did not vote for the English Nationalist party, which the Conservative party is now well down the path to becoming. Indeed, you expect an English nationalist to become the party’s next leader.
May in 2017 was presenting herself as Boudica of hard Brexit until she shifted last month to cave in Theresa so wrong on that too.
Indeed the yougov polling of Boris v Corbyn had the SNP vote unchanged, any movement there was in Scotland was some 2017 Tories back to Scottish Labour.
Plus of course Wales voted Leave
The SNP would love a referendum on Boris Johnson!
Yougov had a Tories under Boris on the same in Scotland as Cameron got in 2010 4 years before 55% of Scots voted for the Union with Scottish Labour close to 30% and the SNP unchanged.
Most Scottish domestic policy is now decided at Holyrood anyway not Westminster regardless of the UK PM it is the FM who decides Scottish domestic policy
BBC Weather reckon it’s raining in London at the moment and could be until lunch, does that sound right? https://www.bbc.com/weather/0/2643743 Even if we lose a whole day over the match, we should still see a result so I’m laying the draw and backing India with a trading bet.
I reckon there's a decent chance of no play today:
And then another one until you get the answer you want.
Here's an original thought. Once the referendum question has been answered, implement the result. Then, if you decide later you might have changed your mind, start plans to arrange another.
A very interesting interview (for the minority who give a damn about F1) with Red Bull's supposed ogre Helmut Marko on what makes an exceptional driver:
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/july-2017/120/interview-dr-helmut-marko “Another good example is Mark Webber – with whom I now have a good relationship; we shook hands and had a good talk – but he never could overtake properly because he didn’t have the concept in his head. There were days when he could be unbelievably fast. At the Nürburgring Vettel could never get anywhere near him and he won there even with a drive-through. In sector three in Barcelona, there was no way Vettel could compete with him and on fast corners on his day he was just unbelievable, faster than Seb. But he never could put the whole thing together for a championship. Thay stupid crash in Korea. He was ahead of Alonso. But he was bothered that Seb was in front, which didn’t matter.”...
And perhaps of interest for the Ricciardo replacement betting:
Sainz? “The first time we put him in an F1 car [Silverstone test 2014] he was quicker than Vettel! That test was the only reason I put him in the Toro Rosso. If his head is free he can deliver. He’s much better since we took Max into RBR. He’s realised the clique around him doesn’t make the decisions. It has to be him.”…
BBC Weather reckon it’s raining in London at the moment and could be until lunch, does that sound right? https://www.bbc.com/weather/0/2643743 Even if we lose a whole day over the match, we should still see a result so I’m laying the draw and backing India with a trading bet.
I reckon there's a decent chance of no play today:
And then another one until you get the answer you want.
Here's an original thought. Once the ybreferendum question has been answered, implement the result. Then, if you decide later you might have changed your mind, start plans to arrange another.
Here’s a thought. Referendums are fundamentally unsuitable to multiple branching consequences where we need third parties to align. They allow demagoguery and simple minded thinking. We elect MPs to mitigate public opinion rather than blindly following it.
More broadly if the basis of a referendum victory is active lying to a public which is, in broad terms, unused to questions which the consequences of a referendum at basis its moral basis is near zero.
That's not what you said - you made a claim on the effect of *existing UK* workers. If lots of people move in and get lower-paying jobs, but the existing workers get better jobs (most directly supervising the newcomers, but also in better jobs created by the new economic activity) that can still reduce the average in those fields, because the newcomers are counted in the average.
The Bank of England do this because they're the Bank of England, and they're interested in understanding things that affect inflation targets, rather than what's a good immigration policy. For background they summarize the existing research on the effect on *native* workers, which is that there's little or no impact, and what impact there is is mainly on other recent immigrants, apart from one study which everybody else debunks.
One of the sad parts of the post referendum landscape is the utter lack of betting posts and descent into shrill virtue signalling.
It’s August, at the arse end of the Brexit negotiations. What do you expect? Is there a market on what dog whistle Boris the burqa botherer will sound next?
Perhaps we should have a referendum on whether Mr Meeks should write any more headers about Brexit. I know how I’d vote.
I'd vote yes. He is a superb and witty writer, he is thought provoking and he is free! What's not to like? If we all agreed with every header this would be a much duller site.
If only for that post on avoiding conscription in Turkey, he deserves to be allowed to write thread headers for the rest of his life.
Here’s a thought. Referendums are fundamentally unsuitable to multiple branching consequences where we need third parties to align. They allow demagoguery and simple minded thinking. We elect MPs to mitigate public opinion rather than blindly following it.
This has been discussed previously. There is an argument for a referendum where the politicians have decided something they want to do, have a concrete plan for delivery, and are seeking public consent.
The Ireland abortion referendum followed this model.
It really isn’t looking good. Things are very unstable and there doesn’t seem to be anyone waiting in the wings. And there is a lot of anger and distrust about. We’re reaping the harvest of decades of negative politics.
It will get worse before it gets better.
It does have the feel of 1780s France about it.
You can remember France in the 1780s?
The next Queen's Speech... "Après moi, le déluge".
If we escape the deluge for the 25 years that elapsed between the death of Madame de Pompadour and the storming of the Bastille, I shall be very happy but also very surprised.
Which PB poster (With a vague interest in cricket) is closest to Lords at the moment, and can they give me a weather update. Need to know when best to lay the draw (Or back it if it'll rain all day)..
Which PB poster (With a vague interest in cricket) is closest to Lords at the moment, and can they give me a weather update. Need to know when best to lay the draw (Or back it if it'll rain all day)..
Surely the value bet if it rains all day is Woakes to play ahead of Moeen?
Edit - covers are still on the pitch according to Cricinfo and there is drizzle.
Which PB poster (With a vague interest in cricket) is closest to Lords at the moment, and can they give me a weather update. Need to know when best to lay the draw (Or back it if it'll rain all day)..
I'm three miles from Lords. It's raining here and the light's not great.
Here’s a thought. Referendums are fundamentally unsuitable to multiple branching consequences where we need third parties to align. They allow demagoguery and simple minded thinking. We elect MPs to mitigate public opinion rather than blindly following it.
This has been discussed previously. There is an argument for a referendum where the politicians have decided something they want to do, have a concrete plan for delivery, and are seeking public consent.
The Ireland abortion referendum followed this model.
It’s not the same point. It’s a question of priorities. Leavers prioritise Leaving above everything, the economy, the jobs of family and themselves, the state itself, peace.
I am at a loss as to why so many posters are determined to extensively rewrite polling responses to fit their own narrative when the literal meaning of the responses fits the facts far better.
Leaving was democratically chosen.
Swap the word Leave for democracy and tell me what you would be prepared to sacrifice democracy for? Should you value your own job more than democracy?
Getting a new job is easier than regaining democracy once lost.
Given that the same gammon voted in the previous referendum not to make our unrepresentative democracy even slightly more representative, I suspect you are flattering them by attributing to them a noble concern for “democracy”.
Granting more seats to those who got less votes and handing the power to the losers isn't democratic.
The poll is very misleading and it is a great shame Alistair can't call it out.
Brexiters don't think peace in NI is at risk, therefore although the question asks them to assume it is, cognitive dissonance doesn't allow it
The alternative polling should be death of every first born son. Still leave would get 30%, because the leavers don't think, despite the premise, that that would happen
Shall we apply arch-Remainer philosophy to General Elections in the future?
Let's say the Tories win a clear majority next time. Dissemble, waste as much time as we can, launch a legal challenge, lose and then appeal.
Claim the politicians lied, the Russians used bots, the winning party spent nearly as much as the losers, the Martians used a brain-scrambling device, we're clever than they are.
Before Parliament even sits, claim the people have changed their minds and democracy demands we have a new election - a people's election. See if we can change the rules so that foreigners and seven-year-olds can vote nest time.
It's all for democracy, innit?
Edit: I forgot about claiming that Parliamentary democracy is flawed in that only MPs should have voted.
And then another one until you get the answer you want.
Here's an original thought. Once the referendum question has been answered, implement the result. Then, if you decide later you might have changed your mind, start plans to arrange another.
OK, I want Softest possible Brexit, implement that.
Oh sorry, I can't hear you over the cries of PB Leavers calling me a traitor. Hmmm, seems Brexit doesn't actually mean one simple thing.
Ultimately, this is one of a number of shire counties at risk of being bankrupted by social care costs. This one has broken early because there were other very significant issues which I am aware of but won't reveal for legal reasons.
There are a number of possible ramifications:
1) We may well see the end of these authorities in favour of unitary ones in the not-so-distant future, as an economy measure;
2) Suddenly Theresa May's unfortunate plans on social care may become an issue again.
Ultimately, this is one of a number of shire counties at risk of being bankrupted by social care costs.
There are a number of possible ramifications:
1) We may well see the end of these authorities in favour of unitary ones in the not-so-distant future, as an economy measure;
2) Suddenly Theresa May's unfortunate plans on social care may become an issue again.
I actually came here to highlight this - really should be the big domestic story right now. I'm aware of some of what they are proposing, and I see court cases ahead over what is and isn't statutory provision. Sounds like a nightmare to work there at the moment, albeit a well-paid nightmare in many roles.
"There seem to be a few people on this thread calling Mr Meeks crazy..."
Mr Meeks isn't crazy. He's an enthusiastic Europhile who's angry about the result, but ultimately he's a realist. Much of his wilder rhetoric is tongue-in-cheek.
However, there are a few for whom Brexit is a red rag to a bull. They'd happily trade democracy for a reversal of the referendum. Once you polarise opinion, any compromises become a betrayal.
I think the first mention of words like - mad, crazy, feral, etc - can be found in the thread header! no doubt designed to provoke but it does make any serious attempt at discuss very difficult.
I have the greatest of respect for Alastair, but he's got this one wrong. Respondents to this poll were far from bonkers. The poll, once you look through its false dichotomy, is essentially asking voters whether a small bunch of violent criminals (or, in the alternative poll he quotes, a small region of the UK) should have a veto on a democratic decision taken by the population of the UK as a whole. Whether you voted Leave or Remain, of course the answer is clear: No. Who can disagree with that?
A more dignified response than the stark staring bonkers ravings of someone who evidently has been driven doolally by Brexit deserves.
Mr Meeks now joins Lord Adonis and AC Wailing in the Pantheon of Fame
Yet another poster who prefers to shoot the messenger than address what the polling clearly indicates. Shame.
Would you list “self awareness” among your strengths ?
I was very aware what reaction this piece would produce.
What not a single poster has done so far is read it to the end where there are testable predictions of what this might mean.
Er, hello..... I did read to the end and posed a question to you last night about one of your testable predictions.
It’s not the same point. It’s a question of priorities. Leavers prioritise Leaving above everything, the economy, the jobs of family and themselves, the state itself, peace.
I am at a loss as to why so many posters are determined to extensively rewrite polling responses to fit their own narrative when the literal meaning of the responses fits the facts far better.
Leaving was democratically chosen.
Swap the word Leave for democracy and tell me what you would be prepared to sacrifice democracy for? Should you value your own job more than democracy?
Getting a new job is easier than regaining democracy once lost.
Given that the same gammon voted in the previous referendum not to make our unrepresentative democracy even slightly more representative, I suspect you are flattering them by attributing to them a noble concern for “democracy”.
Granting more seats to those who got less votes and handing the power to the losers isn't democratic.
Thank you for proving the point that most Leavers do not care about representative democracy, they just use it as a the first argument that comes to hand to bolster their increasingly desperate cause.
perhaps every other week would get us to the very apex of democracy.
Technically, yes.
EDIT: There is a scene in the Big Bang Theory where Amy and Sheldon discuss the deals they have made with their mothers to date or attend church once a year. Amy is bemused by the concept of a Deity that takes attendance...
I am bemused by "democrats" who place limits on how often we can vote.
Ultimately, this is one of a number of shire counties at risk of being bankrupted by social care costs.
There are a number of possible ramifications:
1) We may well see the end of these authorities in favour of unitary ones in the not-so-distant future, as an economy measure;
2) Suddenly Theresa May's unfortunate plans on social care may become an issue again.
I actually came here to highlight this - really should be the big domestic story right now. I'm aware of some of what they are proposing, and I see court cases ahead over what is and isn't statutory provision. Sounds like a nightmare to work there at the moment, albeit a well-paid nightmare in many roles.
I've sent an email to the leader of Nottinghamshire council telling her to get on with unitarising the area.
The poll is very misleading and it is a great shame Alistair can't call it out.
Brexiters don't think peace in NI is at risk, therefore although the question asks them to assume it is, cognitive dissonance doesn't allow it
The alternative polling should be death of every first born son. Still leave would get 30%, because the leavers don't think, despite the premise, that that would happen
Might be more inclined to take the risk if it was every second born son. Just saying.
I wasn’t expecting universal enthusiasm for the article. I was hoping that the actual argument might be engaged with. Two posters have offered up different versions of “they don’t really mean it”, despite this requiring radical reinterpretation of the formally asked questions and all the different polling evidence suggesting that they do.
It’s time to take this polling literally and consider what that means. The answer is not good.
Ask extremely loaded questions, and you get answers that don't mean a lot.
These aren’t extremely loaded questions. They are telling us something useful, if unwelcome.
The one issue I have with your interesting - if depressing - header is your assumption that Corbyn’s Labour will oppose Brexit. I see nothing to support this. Quite the opposite, in fact. Or are you saying that people believe that he might?
Apologies, I missed this. No, I don't think Jeremy Corbyn will lead Labour to oppose Brexit (though he might be dragged in that direction). I do think that those firmly opposed to Brexit will nevertheless support Labour as the least worst option.
"OK, I want Softest possible Brexit, implement that."
if I were PM, I take LEAVE to mean leaving the EU and all it's devilish works ... sorry, all its institution. That means we can make our own decisions on trade and FOM. As the ruling party, we would lead the discussions and ensure that result. It would depend on the EU how hard or soft that Brexit became.
Some people would like the final result, some would dislike it. That's politics. As a Remainer, you would probably dislike it, but many other Remainers would ultimately accept it as honouring the result.
If you'd like to crowd-fund my run to executive office, you'll have to hurry. I'm as old as Jezza, near enough, but a with a couple of fading neurons more.
Comments
Of course, Liam Fox is still an arse.
You're a Benidorm man?
Indeed the yougov polling of Boris v Corbyn had the SNP vote unchanged, any movement there was in Scotland was some 2017 Tories back to Scottish Labour.
Plus of course Wales voted Leave
Provocative piece, Antifrank, as no doubt intended and the usual suspects have decided to shoot from the hip in response. Ho hum.
From a non-Conservative perspective, the actions of the Government since June 2016 have been predicated less on securing a good deal for the citizens of the United Kingdom than trying to hold the Conservative Party together.
It may surprise some on here but the Conservative Party doesn't matter - the good governance of this country does. There are times when a Party has to do something that is incredibly unpopular (at least initially) but which said Party believes to be right.
Politics isn't just about quoting polls and desperately trying to be always on the side of public opinion - oh look, 52% believe in something so we'll believe in it. Politics is about the other 48% and governing for them too. Of course, among the 48% will be those who cannot accept they lost but I would contend the vast majority accept the result but naturally want a say in the future (you don't deny democracy forever to people who were on the wrong side of the argument once).
I appreciate the Conservatives are yoked to the Union - it's one of the primary pillars of their identity and their raison d'etre. I'm not - globalisation has challenged identities and in many ways forced us back into narrower and more comfortable confines. Ultimately, people like people like themselves and the disparity of nations challenges that.
Uncertainty challenges us all - in my lifetime the world has changed out of all recognition and it will continue so to do whether we are in the EU or not. Recognising and confronting these myriad challenges will be what marks out the successful mid-21st century political entity. Success in the past does not of course guarantee success in the future.
Now will you change your mind and do as you're told? Please?
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/08/mid-season-review.html
During the last decade the UK has a cumulative current account deficit of over £700bn
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/hbop/pnbp
Do you think that can be continued forever ?
Which part of "You will love Skegness" was a diss?
*Innocent face*
A parallel might be that Corbyn should not go forward with certain manifesto proposals if they increase the risk of violence. But I accept that the two scenarios are very similar and I can understand why for many Leavers they would answer in this way in a forced choice.
Most Scottish domestic policy is now decided at Holyrood anyway not Westminster regardless of the UK PM it is the FM who decides Scottish domestic policy
In fact on this forum I can think of extraordinarily few Brexiteers who would. Maybe you would but don't project that into us.
You seriously don't think the Brexit vote is the reason BoZo has embraced the Bannon playbook for leadership?
You seriously don't think he's courting the hard right for votes?
Seriously?
Perhaps we should have a referendum on whether Mr Meeks should write any more headers about Brexit. I know how I’d vote.
Boris's comments about the burka also suffer from not being accurate. My understanding (and I'm happy to be told I'm wrong) is the burka is the full veil covering even the face. I've seen them in the UK but in my part of London they are very rare.
The niqab has an opening for the eyes - they are more common but again far from universal. Then you have the hijab which is more than just the headscarf - I believe the word translates to a "modest attire" but it's widely practiced and allows for comfortable and easy-fitting clothing to be worn.
Beyond that you have the chador which is a single garment worn over the top of clothing which covers the head and arms but isn't as restricted as the niqab. That's seen as well.
So when people talk about the burka they really mean the niqab (with the eye slit). In London at any rate I rarely see the full burka.
The perception that women are "forced" to wear niqab or burka is one that is very short on evidence and very long on cultural perception. That there are some who are forced to wear it seems undeniable but as a general practice of compulsion I'm much less convinced. In my part of London (and I appreciate in more socially conservative communities this will differ) hijab is the most common form of attire.
As I said yesterday, there are other religions which prescribe what should be worn and when and by whom but there are particular cultural issues with niqab and burka.
Mr RoyalBlue, you are, of course, free to set up your own blog. I don’t think OGH has ever claimed his site to be a democracy, though it would be worth it just for the fun we’d have arguing about the voting system to use.
It inspires a similar degree of respect.
The problem has always been, as I'm sure you realise, that IF May turns up with an A50 Treaty, the chances are it won't please everybody (or possibly anybody).
In effect, we'd be back to Stage 1 (or a modified version) and you'd be confronted with the impossibility of a binary referendum with three options:
A) Accept the May Deal (for she is a goddess who can walk on water and through fire and is the greatest Conservative PM who has ever bestrode the planet (the Blessed Margaret excluded of course))
C) Please, Please, Please, Please can we stay in - we'll do anything. We'll join Schengen, take the Euro and host Eurovision in perpetuity.
As you can imagine, it's a tough choice.
The only serious option would be in the event of NO Deal for May to call a General Election - May would stand on "I'm right, the Europeans are duplicitous bastards. Britain is wonderful". Corbyn would be all "what about the workers?" while Cable would be nudged awake and say "it's all been a terrible waste of time, effort and political careers. Let's just turn the clock back to 22/6/16 and carry on as if nothing had happened."
After all, even into the early 90s, the Conservatives claimed Labour would turn the clock back to 1979, turn the country back over to the Unions and force The Jam to re-form.
That's entertainment !!
England 2.5
India 3.1
Draw 3.7
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/cricket/event/28832501/multi-market?marketIds=1.146373582
BBC Weather reckon it’s raining in London at the moment and could be until lunch, does that sound right?
https://www.bbc.com/weather/0/2643743
Even if we lose a whole day over the match, we should still see a result so I’m laying the draw and backing India with a trading bet.
Mr Meeks isn't crazy. He's an enthusiastic Europhile who's angry about the result, but ultimately he's a realist. Much of his wilder rhetoric is tongue-in-cheek.
However, there are a few for whom Brexit is a red rag to a bull. They'd happily trade democracy for a reversal of the referendum. Once you polarise opinion, any compromises become a betrayal.
Why are Brexiteers so afraid?
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/working-paper/2015/the-impact-of-immigration-on-occupational-wages-evidence-from-britain
https://www.netweather.tv/live-weather/radar
It's like "would you rather fight 10 duck sized horses or a horse sized duck ?"
File all of it in the bin. Then burn the bin.
Yougov had 24% voting for a far right party potentially and 38% for a right wing pro Brexit Party
"Another vote would be more democracy, not less."
And then another one until you get the answer you want.
Here's an original thought. Once the referendum question has been answered, implement the result. Then, if you decide later you might have changed your mind, start plans to arrange another.
"Alastair is a PB Institution. Only it isn't clear which Institution he escaped from."
LOL.
There is no time limit on democracy.
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/july-2017/120/interview-dr-helmut-marko
“Another good example is Mark Webber – with whom I now have a good relationship; we shook hands and had a good talk – but he never could overtake properly because he didn’t have the concept in his head. There were days when he could be unbelievably fast. At the Nürburgring Vettel could never get anywhere near him and he won there even with a drive-through. In sector three in Barcelona, there was no way Vettel could compete with him and on fast corners on his day he was just unbelievable, faster than Seb. But he never could put the whole thing together for a championship. Thay stupid crash in Korea. He was ahead of Alonso. But he was bothered that Seb was in front, which didn’t matter.”...
And perhaps of interest for the Ricciardo replacement betting:
Sainz? “The first time we put him in an F1 car [Silverstone test 2014] he was quicker than Vettel! That test was the only reason I put him in the Toro Rosso. If his head is free he can deliver. He’s much better since we took Max into RBR. He’s realised the clique around him doesn’t make the decisions. It has to be him.”…
https://twitter.com/duncanbannatyne/status/1027177861873131520?s=21
More broadly if the basis of a referendum victory is active lying to a public which is, in broad terms, unused to questions which the consequences of a referendum at basis its moral basis is near zero.
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1027104221651525633
Totally unconnected with his Leaveriness I'm sure.
One of the sad parts of the post referendum landscape is the utter lack of betting posts and descent into shrill virtue signalling.
The Bank of England do this because they're the Bank of England, and they're interested in understanding things that affect inflation targets, rather than what's a good immigration policy. For background they summarize the existing research on the effect on *native* workers, which is that there's little or no impact, and what impact there is is mainly on other recent immigrants, apart from one study which everybody else debunks.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/08/mid-season-review.html
https://twitter.com/ashleyannotate/status/1027453577885876224
The Ireland abortion referendum followed this model.
Brexit did not.
Edit - covers are still on the pitch according to Cricinfo and there is drizzle.
Brexiters don't think peace in NI is at risk, therefore although the question asks them to assume it is, cognitive dissonance doesn't allow it
The alternative polling should be death of every first born son. Still leave would get 30%, because the leavers don't think, despite the premise, that that would happen
Let's say the Tories win a clear majority next time. Dissemble, waste as much time as we can, launch a legal challenge, lose and then appeal.
Claim the politicians lied, the Russians used bots, the winning party spent nearly as much as the losers, the Martians used a brain-scrambling device, we're clever than they are.
Before Parliament even sits, claim the people have changed their minds and democracy demands we have a new election - a people's election. See if we can change the rules so that foreigners and seven-year-olds can vote nest time.
It's all for democracy, innit?
Edit: I forgot about claiming that Parliamentary democracy is flawed in that only MPs should have voted.
Oh sorry, I can't hear you over the cries of PB Leavers calling me a traitor. Hmmm, seems Brexit doesn't actually mean one simple thing.
Northamptonshire council meets to vote on huge cuts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-45124215
Ultimately, this is one of a number of shire counties at risk of being bankrupted by social care costs. This one has broken early because there were other very significant issues which I am aware of but won't reveal for legal reasons.
There are a number of possible ramifications:
1) We may well see the end of these authorities in favour of unitary ones in the not-so-distant future, as an economy measure;
2) Suddenly Theresa May's unfortunate plans on social care may become an issue again.
EDIT: There is a scene in the Big Bang Theory where Amy and Sheldon discuss the deals they have made with their mothers to date or attend church once a year. Amy is bemused by the concept of a Deity that takes attendance...
I am bemused by "democrats" who place limits on how often we can vote.
1 = democracy
>1 = anarchy (apparently)
"OK, I want Softest possible Brexit, implement that."
if I were PM, I take LEAVE to mean leaving the EU and all it's devilish works ... sorry, all its institution. That means we can make our own decisions on trade and FOM. As the ruling party, we would lead the discussions and ensure that result. It would depend on the EU how hard or soft that Brexit became.
Some people would like the final result, some would dislike it. That's politics. As a Remainer, you would probably dislike it, but many other Remainers would ultimately accept it as honouring the result.
If you'd like to crowd-fund my run to executive office, you'll have to hurry. I'm as old as Jezza, near enough, but a with a couple of fading neurons more.