One yearns for the days when we had the daily You Gov at 10pm . Life has never been the same since...
Things ain't been the same since Mike dropped the party leader's head graphic to show poll leads. An image of multiple Gordon's in the early days of Brown as PM could be quite projectile vomit inducing
- *Northern Ireland-specific solutions* achieved through active Executive engagement - *Particular circumstances of Northern Ireland* with a land border with the EU fully reflected - Northern Ireland established as a *hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market*
'4. Strengthened relationships across the four components parts of the United Kingdom with no internal borders 20. Effective immigration policy which meets the skills, labour and security needs of the UK 29. Jurisdiction of European Court of Justice ended and greater control over our laws restored
WHY WE SUPPORTED A VOTE TO LEAVE: The DUP’s decision to support leaving the European Union was based on principle and practicality. The DUP had opposed joining in the first place, had been consistent in its scepticism throughout our membership and fully supported the question of membership being put to the people of the United Kingdom. This was the demonstration of our commitment to principle'
One yearns for the days when we had the daily You Gov at 10pm . Life has never been the same since...
Things ain't been the same since Mike dropped the party leader's head graphic to show poll leads. An image of multiple Gordon's in the early days of Brown as PM could be quite projectile vomit inducing
- *Northern Ireland-specific solutions* achieved through active Executive engagement - *Particular circumstances of Northern Ireland* with a land border with the EU fully reflected - Northern Ireland established as a *hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market*
'4. Strengthened relationships across the four components parts of the United Kingdom with no internal borders 20. Effective immigration policy which meets the skills, labour and security needs of the UK 29. Jurisdiction of European Court of Justice ended and greater control over our laws restored
WHY WE SUPPORTED A VOTE TO LEAVE: The DUP’s decision to support leaving the European Union was based on principle and practicality. The DUP had opposed joining in the first place, had been consistent in its scepticism throughout our membership and fully supported the question of membership being put to the people of the United Kingdom. This was the demonstration of our commitment to principle'
Perhaps your original statement would have been better reversed:
Not "the DUP won most seats in NI on a commitment to ensure NI's Brexit followed the UK's", but "the DUP won most seats in NI on a commitment to ensure the UK's Brexit followed NI's".
- *Northern Ireland-specific solutions* achieved through active Executive engagement - *Particular circumstances of Northern Ireland* with a land border with the EU fully reflected - Northern Ireland established as a *hub for trade from Irish Republic into the broader UK market*
'4. Strengthened relationships across the four components parts of the United Kingdom with no internal borders 20. Effective immigration policy which meets the skills, labour and security needs of the UK 29. Jurisdiction of European Court of Justice ended and greater control over our laws restored
WHY WE SUPPORTED A VOTE TO LEAVE: The DUP’s decision to support leaving the European Union was based on principle and practicality. The DUP had opposed joining in the first place, had been consistent in its scepticism throughout our membership and fully supported the question of membership being put to the people of the United Kingdom. This was the demonstration of our commitment to principle'
Perhaps your original statement would have been better reversed:
Not "the DUP won most seats in NI on a commitment to ensure NI's Brexit followed the UK's", but "the DUP won most seats in NI on a commitment to ensure the UK's Brexit followed NI's".
"Michael Kretschmer, prime minister of the German state of Saxony, knew he was entering the lion’s den. But even he looked unprepared for the boos, whistles and catcalls that greeted him in Chemnitz, a city boiling over with rage and hurt." https://www.ft.com/content/314af0cc-ad02-11e8-94bd-cba20d67390c
Chemnitz was officially named "Karl-Marx-Stadt" during the Cold War.
Yes it was. I wonder if that was the only place in East Germany that had its name changed by the Soviets.
My concern with a second referendum (lets all be honest and call it that) is the complexity of the questions, the margin of the decision, the time needed to get it through the HOC and HOL, the period for a campaign and the disaster of a similar result but to remain.
Furthermore how are the EU going to confirm the details of us remaining for the campaign even to be valid
I assume TM does control this as it would need to go to Parliament so she would have to lose not only a VNOC but also a leadership campaign would be needed to elect her successor that would go on for a long time.
Therefore I think it is not practical or even possible and do not ask me how I would vote, I have no idea
I don't think actually doing it is complicated if the UK PM wants to do it, but the domestic political parts are very complicated, probably impossibly so.
The question could just be the same question again. You need an Article 50 extension, which the other member states would agree to. The period if the campaign would be like last time but shorter. The details of remaining would be the details before the whole thing happened, with the possible exception of the agencies that had already left. I guess they'd have to revise the budget, which IIUC gets decided without Britain, but they can do that afterwards. A similar result but to remain would not be remotely disastrous: Leave enthusiasts would try to murder MPs etc, but they've done that before, and they'll do it anyway, because they'll consider any deal a betrayal.
But the practical problem is how TMay does this without losing her job even if she wants to, which seems tricky, unless the Leave side obligingly run against her earlier and lose.
My concern with a second referendum (lets all be honest and call it that) is the complexity of the questions, the margin of the decision, the time needed to get it through the HOC and HOL, the period for a campaign and the disaster of a similar result but to remain.
Furthermore how are the EU going to confirm the details of us remaining for the campaign even to be valid
I assume TM does control this as it would need to go to Parliament so she would have to lose not only a VNOC but also a leadership campaign would be needed to elect her successor that would go on for a long time.
Therefore I think it is not practical or even possible and do not ask me how I would vote, I have no idea
I don't think actually doing it is complicated if the UK PM wants to do it, but the domestic political parts are very complicated, probably impossibly so.
The question could just be the same question again. You need an Article 50 extension, which the other member states would agree to. The period if the campaign would be like last time but shorter. The details of remaining would be the details before the whole thing happened, with the possible exception of the agencies that had already left. I guess they'd have to revise the budget, which IIUC gets decided without Britain, but they can do that afterwards. A similar result but to remain would not be remotely disastrous: Leave enthusiasts would try to murder MPs etc, but they've done that before, and they'll do it anyway, because they'll consider any deal a betrayal.
But the practical problem is how TMay does this without losing her job even if she wants to, which seems tricky, unless the Leave side obligingly run against her earlier and lose.
The practical problem is over 70% of Tory voters now back Leave and most Tory voters and members and MPs oppose a second EU referendum so as long as we have a Tory led government there will not be one and even Corbyn is still holding out against one.
Plus remaining in the EU as it was with free movement etc solves nothing and would just lead to the same demands for Brexit all over again in a few years if the EU presses on with ever closer union
Nick Boles is now backing EFTA/EEA instead of Chequers.
Actually he is backing EFTA/EEA only as a bridge to CETA. Which would be a reasonable idea except that we can’t trust our politicians not to make this temporary status permanent. If only they had accepted the referendum result this might have been an option, but not now.
If you believed in your plan, you would be confident of winning people over as a result of its successful implementation. The fact that you want people to sign up in blood in advance just broadcasts your doubts.
We already won people over to our plan. We won the referendum.
CETA is the only plan that will command majority support in the UK and HoC. Which is why May won’t even try for it. If you want to Remain in all but name, make sure the plan that will mean that we can Leave as we were promised is not even discussed.
Nick Boles is now backing EFTA/EEA instead of Chequers.
Actually he is backing EFTA/EEA only as a bridge to CETA. Which would be a reasonable idea except that we can’t trust our politicians not to make this temporary status permanent. If only they had accepted the referendum result this might have been an option, but not now.
If you believed in your plan, you would be confident of winning people over as a result of its successful implementation. The fact that you want people to sign up in blood in advance just broadcasts your doubts.
We already won people over to our plan. We won the referendum.
CETA is the only plan that will command majority support in the UK and HoC. Which is why May won’t even try for it. If you want to Remain in all but name, make sure the plan that will mean that we can Leave as we were promised is not even discussed.
As a professional politician, why would May actively suppress an option that was both deliverable and electorally popular? One or both of those things is not true as she sees it.
I don’t know if Ms Sturgeon believes Mr Salmond’s accusers. But she has been relentless this week in backing, in general terms, women who complain about harassment.
She has also stuck by Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans, who led the investigation into the allegations, and who Mr Salmond has repeatedly attacked. Ms Evans was “absolutely right to ensure that the procedure was applied in this case and she has my full support in having done so,” Ms Sturgeon said.
If the First Minister does believe the women, imagine how Mr Salmond’s actions would strike her.
From that perspective, she would not see a Nationalist hero defending himself against injustice, she would see a sexual menace prepared to risk incalculable damage to his own party and its cause in order to maintain his own mythology.
From that perspective, she would see someone willing to burn everything to the ground, so long as he got out unscathed.
Comments
20. Effective immigration policy which meets the skills, labour and security needs of the UK
29. Jurisdiction of European Court of Justice ended and greater control over our laws restored
WHY WE SUPPORTED A VOTE TO LEAVE: The DUP’s decision to support leaving the European Union was based on principle and practicality. The DUP had opposed joining in the first place, had been consistent in its scepticism throughout our membership and fully supported the question of membership being put to the people of the United Kingdom. This was the demonstration of our commitment to principle'
http://www.mydup.com/images/uploads/publications/DUP_Wminster_Manifesto_2017_v5.pdf
Not "the DUP won most seats in NI on a commitment to ensure NI's Brexit followed the UK's",
but "the DUP won most seats in NI on a commitment to ensure the UK's Brexit followed NI's".
The question could just be the same question again. You need an Article 50 extension, which the other member states would agree to. The period if the campaign would be like last time but shorter. The details of remaining would be the details before the whole thing happened, with the possible exception of the agencies that had already left. I guess they'd have to revise the budget, which IIUC gets decided without Britain, but they can do that afterwards. A similar result but to remain would not be remotely disastrous: Leave enthusiasts would try to murder MPs etc, but they've done that before, and they'll do it anyway, because they'll consider any deal a betrayal.
But the practical problem is how TMay does this without losing her job even if she wants to, which seems tricky, unless the Leave side obligingly run against her earlier and lose.
Plus remaining in the EU as it was with free movement etc solves nothing and would just lead to the same demands for Brexit all over again in a few years if the EU presses on with ever closer union
CETA is the only plan that will command majority support in the UK and HoC. Which is why May won’t even try for it. If you want to Remain in all but name, make sure the plan that will mean that we can Leave as we were promised is not even discussed.
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1035990026696491009
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1035988905873612800
She has also stuck by Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans, who led the investigation into the allegations, and who Mr Salmond has repeatedly attacked. Ms Evans was “absolutely right to ensure that the procedure was applied in this case and she has my full support in having done so,” Ms Sturgeon said.
If the First Minister does believe the women, imagine how Mr Salmond’s actions would strike her.
From that perspective, she would not see a Nationalist hero defending himself against injustice, she would see a sexual menace prepared to risk incalculable damage to his own party and its cause in order to maintain his own mythology.
From that perspective, she would see someone willing to burn everything to the ground, so long as he got out unscathed.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/16611836.tom-gordon-tommy-sheridan-offers-an-unhappy-lesson-for-the-snp/