Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
Barnier would throw it out in less than 5 minutes, so it won't
I agree the referendum was flawed. Of course it was.
But it was the only chance I was ever going to get to do anything to stop the direction of travel I did not like. The fact that Lisbon vote was reneged on weighed heavily in my calculation.
This was it, the sole chance in my lifetime (I was at primary school in 1975). there was no 45/55 grey box. It was all or nothing. So I chose all.
I do not regret it for a moment, because I want to live in that responsive democracy to my dying day, and I simply lost any faith that the EU was or could become that, because my judgement was democracy was always going to be subverted to "ever closer union".
You may disagree, fair enough.
(Presses lightly on Post Comment).
I agree with this almost entirely.
It does look like the deal will be a bit of a fudge, in order to try and keep as many people as possible content, not happy as that's almost impossible. If we finally leave the EU as far as I'm concerned it's job done. We can diverge further over time, and we won't be bound to ever closer union.
When the sky doesn't come crashing down we can go back to worrying about actually important things again.
Amen
I agree. It will be some sort of fudge, fair enough. But the direction of travel will have been halted. Gradually we can do things differently if we want (we may not want to in many areas).
Michael Collins is my hero here. He signed a fudge, and lost his life for it. But he was far more right than wrong in the long run.
I would like to know if, post-Brexit, he will be returning to the UK to live in the paradise he is so passionate about.
TBF, it is a question that could be asked of other "remote Leavers" who urge a risky course (Brexit) from the safety of their ex-pat bunkers
Who are you to tell British citizens who pay UK taxes where they should live - regardless of how they voted?
I never mentioned taxes, nor am I telling anyone where to live. I was merely wondering if those pushing the "Leave" agenda from abroad are prepared to live in the post-Brexit UK that they argue for. Brexit has no consequences for them but it does for those of us who stay in the UK.
If they refuse to live in post-Brexit Britain then I think that diminishes any argument they put forward on its behalf - and that is the politest I can put it.
Well done. You managed not to say, f---ing hypocrites, which would have been much less polite I'd say.
Surely you accept that all British citizens have equal rights wherever they choose to reside.
Re UK citizens marrying non-EU citizens and rights of return:
As with schools term time holiday prohibition, it's aimed at a certain segment of population. One can't clearly say that though so the policy is applied widely regardless of consequence. If civil servants apply rules in a subjective way there would be the usual complaints.
Isn't that what the primary purpose rule was for? Why hasn't it or something similar designed to deal with the particular problems of young girls of South East Asian origin being forced into marriage been reintroduced?
Because designing such a rule that catches the wrongdoers whilst ensuring genuine cases do not fall foul of it is extremely hard.
We had such a rule before 1997. Is there any evidence it didn't work? Wasn't the reason it was removed was because Labour wanted to suck up to some of its voters to make it easier for them to bring in distant family members?
I would not have thought it that hard to make the distinction between someone like Mrs Sandpit living with Mr Sandpit for a number of years, with a family etc and some 17 year old taken out of school and married to a distant cousin in Pakistan. It rather seems to me that when people say it is "hard" what they really mean is that it will make obvious what happens in some communities and that they don't what to make it obvious because that would upset some people.
What contingency planning exactly is Cameron supposed not to have done or permitted? As the Brexiteers keep telling us, the sky hasn't fallen in. There's no contingency which hasn't been addressed, two and a half years after the vote. There was no financial instability, thanks to the prompt action by Osborne and Carney.
Or is the complaint that he didn't fill in the gaps in the Leave campaign's political aims, and tell them whether Brexit should mean EEA or Canada Plus or WTO? If so, is anyone seriously going to claim with a straight face that he would have been able to do without being utterly howled down by exactly the people who claim he should have done such planning?
.... Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Those abroad are unlikely to undergo the full-Brexit experience. Because they are abroad. Those within the UK who argue for "Leave" have, in my view, a much stronger moral case than those arguing for it from afar.
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
I think your core reason for leaving resonates with millions of leavers. Whatever type of Brexit we end up with we can be assured the direction of travel regarding further EU integration will have been reversed, and will undo the surrender of powers that have taken place in the past generation. For many of the 17 million this alone will be cause for satisfaction. Some of the most ardent Europhiles fail to realise that the majority of voters on both sides are not overly concerned or understanding of the specifics, it is our broad relationship with the EU rather than the type of deal that matters most.
I can't disagree with most of what you write, and in the end most reasonable people hope a compromise is the way forward. I do think though that you possibly confuse so-called "Europhiles" with people that simply think it Brexit a pointless venture. I do not love the EU (though I think it has achieved a great deal); it has serious problems, but then so does our own domestic system . The real problem is not with "Europhiles", it is the headbanging ERG fanatics who want to pretend the vote was an overwhelming victory for their extremist vision of a hard brexit. They need putting back in their box.
It's interesting that the Brexit post mortem seems to be travelling back further into the mists of time. We've moved on from the failure of the Remain campaign to win and we're into why the government didn't plan for a Leave vote. Soon it will be why no-one considered the risk of a Leave vote before holding the referendum.
.... Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Those abroad are unlikely to undergo the full-Brexit experience. Because they are abroad. Those within the UK who argue for "Leave" have, in my view, a much stronger moral case than those arguing for it from afar.
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
The luck of the Irish hey? Sadly my Irish ancestry on my mother's side is one generation too far for me to be able to claim the birth right of my children to have freedom of movement within the EU. (The birth right stolen by a load of pensioners who read too many war comics)
Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
It's not an alternative to the backstop. It's a proposal for what could be in a deal with the EU (which would obviate the need for a backstop, as would Chequers of course). Do keep up.
It's true that it's perfectly sane, albeit vague on the crucial point of issue:
- Initial full regulatory alignment, making goods unacceptable for sale in the Republic of Ireland equally unacceptable in Northern Ireland.
- Data-sharing and co-operation between authorities can raise suspected non-compliance or infringement speedily if regulations diverge
How can it be that DD didn't get agreement on this from our EU friends, if it's so easy?
Because Barnier would like us to keep NI in the Single Market and Customs Union and frustrate Brexit as a first preference. May showed every step of the way she would fold so why should he agree to it?
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
It's interesting that the Brexit post mortem seems to be travelling back further into the mists of time. We've moved on from the failure of the Remain campaign to win and we're into why the government didn't plan for a Leave vote. Soon it will be why no-one considered the risk of a Leave vote before holding the referendum.
.... Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Those abroad are unlikely to undergo the full-Brexit experience. Because they are abroad. Those within the UK who argue for "Leave" have, in my view, a much stronger moral case than those arguing for it from afar.
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
The luck of the Irish hey? Sadly my Irish ancestry on my mother's side is one generation too far for me to be able to claim the birth right of my children to have freedom of movement within the EU. (The birth right stolen by a load of pensioners who read too many war comics)
She’s a qualified teacher of English in Ukraine, she’d walk into a job as a teacher of Russian in a private school in U.K. for probably £40k salary, a net contributor even if she wasn’t my wife.
You've got my sympathies. We went through this shit for almost five years. It will basically never happen unless you lawyer up. The universal Home Office response to any case that slightly unusual (my wife is Indian and qualified/practiced as a dentist in Russia) is incompetence, inactivity and indifference. If I had to do it again I wouldn't even bother trying; I'd just move to Ireland for 5 years and naturalise her as an EU citizen there.
Gospozha Sandpit will still need a QTS qualification (assuming she already has RFL quals) to teach in the UK (assuming her Ukranian degree is recognised which is another expensive and lengthy rigmarole). I have never heard of a single subject Russian teacher although somewhere like St Pauls might have one. She'd probably have to double up with another language and/or subject. Spanish teachers are the hot property at the moment for some reason.
Yeah, it’s a nightmare but hey ho, we have a reasonably comfortable life in the sandpit. As and when we decide to move to the U.K. then we’ll work through the various hoops that people put in our way. Several people have said it pretty much can’t be done without a lawyer, so we’ll put a couple of grand aside for that eventuality.
As I understand it the QTS isn’t required for private schools or private tuition.
I would like to know if, post-Brexit, he will be returning to the UK to live in the paradise he is so passionate about.
TBF, it is a question that could be asked of other "remote Leavers" who urge a risky course (Brexit) from the safety of their ex-pat bunkers
Who are you to tell British citizens who pay UK taxes where they should live - regardless of how they voted?
I never mentioned taxes, nor am I telling anyone where to live. I was merely wondering if those pushing the "Leave" agenda from abroad are prepared to live in the post-Brexit UK that they argue for. Brexit has no consequences for them but it does for those of us who stay in the UK.
If they refuse to live in post-Brexit Britain then I think that diminishes any argument they put forward on its behalf - and that is the politest I can put it.
Of course you didn't mention taxes because you don't understand that probably the majority of Brits who live abroad pay probably the bulk of their taxes straight into the UK coffers. I certainly do and as a British citizen I take the old-fashioned view that this gives me every right to comment on the actions of the UK government. Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Which is fair enough - but hardly addresses my point that the incentives for what you wish to see in a post Brexit Britain are rather distant from those applying to the rest of us who live here.
What contingency planning exactly is Cameron supposed not to have done or permitted? As the Brexiteers keep telling us, the sky hasn't fallen in. There's no contingency which hasn't been addressed, two and a half years after the vote. There was no financial instability, thanks to the prompt action by Osborne and Carney.
Or is the complaint that he didn't fill in the gaps in the Leave campaign's political aims, and tell them whether Brexit should mean EEA or Canada Plus or WTO? If so, is anyone seriously going to claim with a straight face that he would have been able to do without being utterly howled down by exactly the people who claim he should have done such planning?
Cameron was clearly underprepared. For one he could have confirmed that the executive had legal authority to trigger A50 and passed the bill before the vote.
Politically he was hugely underprepared, largely not engaged believing his own hype that his popularity was enough to win the day.
You should not call a vote if losing is not an option.
Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
It's not an alternative to the backstop. It's a proposal for what could be in a deal with the EU (which would obviate the need for a backstop, as would Chequers of course). Do keep up.
It's true that it's perfectly sane, albeit vague on the crucial point of issue:
- Initial full regulatory alignment, making goods unacceptable for sale in the Republic of Ireland equally unacceptable in Northern Ireland.
- Data-sharing and co-operation between authorities can raise suspected non-compliance or infringement speedily if regulations diverge
How can it be that DD didn't get agreement on this from our EU friends, if it's so easy?
Because Barnier would like us to keep NI in the Single Market and Customs Union and frustrate Brexit. May showed every step of the way she would fold so why should he agree to it.
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
Oh dear, are you another Thatcherite who has helped destroy her biggest legacy (the single market etc etc.)? The EU is a Thatcherite construct. It is why Corbyn hates it
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
.... Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Those abroad are unlikely to undergo the full-Brexit experience. Because they are abroad. Those within the UK who argue for "Leave" have, in my view, a much stronger moral case than those arguing for it from afar.
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
You clearly failed to read my initial comment. My pension income along with thousands of others fell immediately by 20% odd immediately following the vote due to the fall in sterling. For many their incomes were already pretty low and they may not have had much in the way of savings to cushion the blow. Exactly how have the majority of the UK resident population suffered anything like that immediate cut in income? Please don't tell me that my moral case for argument about Brexit are somehow weaker. As I said I voted Remain but I accept the loss because democracy is more important than money.
She’s a qualified teacher of English in Ukraine, she’d walk into a job as a teacher of Russian in a private school in U.K. for probably £40k salary, a net contributor even if she wasn’t my wife.
You've got my sympathies. We went through this shit for almost five years. It will basically never happen unless you lawyer up. The universal Home Office response to any case that slightly unusual (my wife is Indian and qualified/practiced as a dentist in Russia) is incompetence, inactivity and indifference. If I had to do it again I wouldn't even bother trying; I'd just move to Ireland for 5 years and naturalise her as an EU citizen there.
Gospozha Sandpit will still need a QTS qualification (assuming she already has RFL quals) to teach in the UK (assuming her Ukranian degree is recognised which is another expensive and lengthy rigmarole). I have never heard of a single subject Russian teacher although somewhere like St Pauls might have one. She'd probably have to double up with another language and/or subject. Spanish teachers are the hot property at the moment for some reason.
I know a local state school with a single-subject Russian teacher.
Quinnipiac gives Democrats a 14% lead for the House in the midterms and polling shows by 58% to 27% voters want Congress to be more of a check on Trump
.... Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Those abroad are unlikely to undergo the full-Brexit experience. Because they are abroad. Those within the UK who argue for "Leave" have, in my view, a much stronger moral case than those arguing for it from afar.
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
The luck of the Irish hey? Sadly my Irish ancestry on my mother's side is one generation too far for me to be able to claim the birth right of my children to have freedom of movement within the EU. (The birth right stolen by a load of pensioners who read too many war comics)
"stole your birthright" your tears sustain me.
No my children's. I am sure tears sustain you. The fires of hell always hiss when the tears of heaven fall upon them
Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
It's not an alternative to the backstop. It's a proposal for what could be in a deal with the EU (which would obviate the need for a backstop, as would Chequers of course). Do keep up.
It's true that it's perfectly sane, albeit vague on the crucial point of issue:
- Initial full regulatory alignment, making goods unacceptable for sale in the Republic of Ireland equally unacceptable in Northern Ireland.
- Data-sharing and co-operation between authorities can raise suspected non-compliance or infringement speedily if regulations diverge
How can it be that DD didn't get agreement on this from our EU friends, if it's so easy?
Because Barnier would like us to keep NI in the Single Market and Customs Union and frustrate Brexit as a first preference. May showed every step of the way she would fold so why should he agree to it?
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
Ah, the old 'backbone' argument.
Maggie's backbone was immeasurably strengthened by the fact that at the time she had a veto on the EU budget. Theresa May is not lacking backbone - she's 'a bloody difficult woman', don't forget - but she has neither a veto, nor a particularly strong negotiating position, nor a commons majority, nor the support of some of her own MPs.
How on earth anyone thinks that in these circumstances she can simply brush aside anything inconvenient is extraordinary.
In many ways, the Leave vote was a call to stop further integration until we have a say. Particularly after it is waved through by a the government of the day without a public vote. The great and the good won the Lisbon vote by not having one, thus winning the battle but not the war.
I don't hate Poles and Lithuanians, they're generally good Catholic lads and lasses, and like a drink. I'd be happy with Martians in any variety of green, if we decide we want them. if we distrust anyone, it's the governments. The ratchet effect as described by Mr Dancer is the problem. You can only go one way and all you are allowed to choose is the speed to some extent.
Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
It's not an alternative to the backstop. It's a proposal for what could be in a deal with the EU (which would obviate the need for a backstop, as would Chequers of course). Do keep up.
It's true that it's perfectly sane, albeit vague on the crucial point of issue:
- Initial full regulatory alignment, making goods unacceptable for sale in the Republic of Ireland equally unacceptable in Northern Ireland.
- Data-sharing and co-operation between authorities can raise suspected non-compliance or infringement speedily if regulations diverge
How can it be that DD didn't get agreement on this from our EU friends, if it's so easy?
Because Barnier would like us to keep NI in the Single Market and Customs Union and frustrate Brexit as a first preference. May showed every step of the way she would fold so why should he agree to it?
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
Of course with the NI issue and May wanting a better deal than Canada and Barnier refusing a UK wide Canada deal and staying in the single market for goods only the whole UK is now likely to stay in the Single Market and Customs Union in all but name with a work permit and study place on arrival requirement
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Cameron was clearly underprepared. For one he could have confirmed that the executive had legal authority to trigger A50 and passed the bill before the vote.
That's tantamount to saying that he should have anticipated Theresa May calling and screwing up an election. There wasn't a single person on this earth who suggested before the referendum that there was any difficulty with the government triggering Article 50, and there wouldn't have been, if Theresa May had had a majority.
.... Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Those abroad are unlikely to undergo the full-Brexit experience. Because they are abroad. Those within the UK who argue for "Leave" have, in my view, a much stronger moral case than those arguing for it from afar.
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
I'm looking forward to Ireland introducing US-style global taxation of passport holders. You've got the passport, now have the 52% marginal rate tax....
Cameron was clearly underprepared. For one he could have confirmed that the executive had legal authority to trigger A50 and passed the bill before the vote.
That's tantamount to saying that he should have anticipated Theresa May calling and screwing up an election. There wasn't a single person on this earth who suggested before the referendum that there was any difficulty with the government triggering Article 50, and there wouldn't have been, if Theresa May had had a majority.
Cameron was clearly underprepared. For one he could have confirmed that the executive had legal authority to trigger A50 and passed the bill before the vote.
That's tantamount to saying that he should have anticipated Theresa May calling and screwing up an election. There wasn't a single person on this earth who suggested before the referendum that there was any difficulty with the government triggering Article 50, and there wouldn't have been, if Theresa May had had a majority.
Major rewrite of history there. She invoked article 50 before calling the election.
.... Your implication seems to be that if British citizens choose to live outside the UK that diminishes them in some way.I beg to differ. We have as much right as anyone to opine on matters pertaining to the UK as any other citizen - including even those with dual passports.
Those abroad are unlikely to undergo the full-Brexit experience. Because they are abroad. Those within the UK who argue for "Leave" have, in my view, a much stronger moral case than those arguing for it from afar.
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
I'm looking forward to Ireland introducing US-style global taxation of passport holders. You've got the passport, now have the 52% marginal rate tax....
Cameron was clearly underprepared. For one he could have confirmed that the executive had legal authority to trigger A50 and passed the bill before the vote.
That's tantamount to saying that he should have anticipated Theresa May calling and screwing up an election. There wasn't a single person on this earth who suggested before the referendum that there was any difficulty with the government triggering Article 50, and there wouldn't have been, if Theresa May had had a majority.
Major rewrite of history there. She invoked article 50 before calling the election.
Oops, not a rewrite of history, but a senior moment!
Still, my main point stands, no-one before the referendum was worrying about any difficulty in the government triggering Article 50. It's a bit far-fetched to claim Cameron should have anticipated it, and in any case what difference would it have made if he had?
I think your core reason for leaving resonates with millions of leavers. Whatever type of Brexit we end up with we can be assured the direction of travel regarding further EU integration will have been reversed, and will undo the surrender of powers that have taken place in the past generation. For many of the 17 million this alone will be cause for satisfaction. Some of the most ardent Europhiles fail to realise that the majority of voters on both sides are not overly concerned or understanding of the specifics, it is our broad relationship with the EU rather than the type of deal that matters most.
I can't disagree with most of what you write, and in the end most reasonable people hope a compromise is the way forward. I do think though that you possibly confuse so-called "Europhiles" with people that simply think it Brexit a pointless venture. I do not love the EU (though I think it has achieved a great deal); it has serious problems, but then so does our own domestic system . The real problem is not with "Europhiles", it is the headbanging ERG fanatics who want to pretend the vote was an overwhelming victory for their extremist vision of a hard brexit. They need putting back in their box.
Yes I agree there are some ERG headbangers with very rigid views of our post Brexit future but with no plan of how to get there (I do think a minority of the ERG members have a plausible vision even if the outcome is unlikely). I do also think the 'people's vote' fanatics are cut from the same cloth, so perhaps I shouldn't have identified them as Europhiles They have no idea on what to ask, when to ask it, how to implement the result, if the public actually want to be asked the question and what the repercussions are. I fail to see how asking another question to the electorate so soon after the last one will do anything more than muddy the waters and lead to further division.
It's interesting that the Brexit post mortem seems to be travelling back further into the mists of time. We've moved on from the failure of the Remain campaign to win and we're into why the government didn't plan for a Leave vote. Soon it will be why no-one considered the risk of a Leave vote before holding the referendum.
I blame the Romans. What have the Romans ever done for us?
Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
It's not an alternative to the backstop. It's a proposal for what could be in a deal with the EU (which would obviate the need for a backstop, as would Chequers of course). Do keep up.
It's true that it's perfectly sane, albeit vague on the crucial point of issue:
- Initial full regulatory alignment, making goods unacceptable for sale in the Republic of Ireland equally unacceptable in Northern Ireland.
- Data-sharing and co-operation between authorities can raise suspected non-compliance or infringement speedily if regulations diverge
How can it be that DD didn't get agreement on this from our EU friends, if it's so easy?
Because Barnier would like us to keep NI in the Single Market and Customs Union and frustrate Brexit. May showed every step of the way she would fold so why should he agree to it.
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
Oh dear, are you another Thatcherite who has helped destroy her biggest legacy (the single market etc etc.)? The EU is a Thatcherite construct. It is why Corbyn hates it
You are right that it is, and no true Thatcherite should want to leave the Single Market lightly, especially when you have old style left wing state socialists in the wings ready and willing to take over.
I think your core reason for leaving resonates with millions of leavers. Whatever type of Brexit we end up with we can be assured the direction of travel regarding further EU integration will have been reversed, and will undo the surrender of powers that have taken place in the past generation. For many of the 17 million this alone will be cause for satisfaction. Some of the most ardent Europhiles fail to realise that the majority of voters on both sides are not overly concerned or understanding of the specifics, it is our broad relationship with the EU rather than the type of deal that matters most.
I can't disagree with most of what you write, and in the end most reasonable people hope a compromise is the way forward. I do think though that you possibly confuse so-called "Europhiles" with people that simply think it Brexit a pointless venture. I do not love the EU (though I think it has achieved a great deal); it has serious problems, but then so does our own domestic system . The real problem is not with "Europhiles", it is the headbanging ERG fanatics who want to pretend the vote was an overwhelming victory for their extremist vision of a hard brexit. They need putting back in their box.
I don't disagree, mostly. Some sort of fudge will be the order of the day. Hopefully it will have some hard nuggetty bits in it for me and some nice soft chewy bits for you.
I think the ERG is overplaying its hand, and I think Barnier is too.
All risk thereby no fudge and a lot of nuts.
Where I do, respectfully, part company, is that it is pointless. Hard yes, and being made more so, in my view by an EU that is unnecessarily scared that it will set off a domino effect, But preserving our right to decide for ourselves is vital, in my view.
I think your core reason for leaving resonates with millions of leavers. Whatever type of Brexit we end up with we can be assured the direction of travel regarding further EU integration will have been reversed, and will undo the surrender of powers that have taken place in the past generation. For many of the 17 million this alone will be cause for satisfaction. Some of the most ardent Europhiles fail to realise that the majority of voters on both sides are not overly concerned or understanding of the specifics, it is our broad relationship with the EU rather than the type of deal that matters most.
I can't disagree with most of what you write, and in the end most reasonable people hope a compromise is the way forward. I do think though that you possibly confuse so-called "Europhiles" with people that simply think it Brexit a pointless venture. I do not love the EU (though I think it has achieved a great deal); it has serious problems, but then so does our own domestic system . The real problem is not with "Europhiles", it is the headbanging ERG fanatics who want to pretend the vote was an overwhelming victory for their extremist vision of a hard brexit. They need putting back in their box.
Yes I agree there are some ERG headbangers with very rigid views of our post Brexit future but with no plan of how to get there (I do think a minority of the ERG members have a plausible vision even if the outcome is unlikely). I do also think the 'people's vote' fanatics are cut from the same cloth, so perhaps I shouldn't have identified them as Europhiles They have no idea on what to ask, when to ask it, how to implement the result, if the public actually want to be asked the question and what the repercussions are. I fail to see how asking another question to the electorate so soon after the last one will do anything more than muddy the waters and lead to further division.
I don't want another referendum, but I think some of you that are so vociferously against one do so in the belief you have the answer you want. If the result had gone the other way with such a small percentage difference I doubt Farage et al would be saying "we have to respect the-will-o-the-people "
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
It's interesting that the Brexit post mortem seems to be travelling back further into the mists of time. We've moved on from the failure of the Remain campaign to win and we're into why the government didn't plan for a Leave vote. Soon it will be why no-one considered the risk of a Leave vote before holding the referendum.
I blame the Romans. What have the Romans ever done for us?
Due to have some major bowel surgery at the RVI in Newcastle on Friday. Quite nervous but I’m in very good hands. My surgeon and other NHS staff have been/are fantastic.
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
Curious to see older voters and younger voters both trending more Democrat and just the 35-49 cohort staying loyal to the GOP. Hilary won the Hispanic vote by 36 points and the gap is now only 44 so not huge movement.
Trump's problem is among the white vote where the 21 point lead the GOP had in 2016 has been reduced to just 3 or 4 points.
These numbers would, if repeated at a GE, mean a big Democrat win but by comparison Johnson beat Goldwater 61-39 in 1964.
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
Getting into a turnip throwing contest with malcolm is not a sensible or productive activity.
Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
It's not an alternative to the backstop. It's a proposal for what could be in a deal with the EU (which would obviate the need for a backstop, as would Chequers of course). Do keep up.
It's true that it's perfectly sane, albeit vague on the crucial point of issue:
- Initial full regulatory alignment, making goods unacceptable for sale in the Republic of Ireland equally unacceptable in Northern Ireland.
- Data-sharing and co-operation between authorities can raise suspected non-compliance or infringement speedily if regulations diverge
How can it be that DD didn't get agreement on this from our EU friends, if it's so easy?
Because Barnier would like us to keep NI in the Single Market and Customs Union and frustrate Brexit. May showed every step of the way she would fold so why should he agree to it.
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
Oh dear, are you another Thatcherite who has helped destroy her biggest legacy (the single market etc etc.)? The EU is a Thatcherite construct. It is why Corbyn hates it
You are right that it is, and no true Thatcherite should want to leave the Single Market lightly, especially when you have old style left wing state socialists in the wings ready and willing to take over.
I have just spent the morning with my finance team trying to resolve a massive VAT issue for our largest USA customer. The ERG proposal is a broad brush concept that has never been tried in practice globally and is riven with complexity and potential for fraud.
We do not specify the route on how goods that we ship to EC go. Thus they may or may not pass over the Irish border. You cannot have one rule for Ireland and another for France.
If we ship goods by say Fedex we complete all the paperwork here as normal. The trouble is that around 35% of the goods we ship to USA have a customs hold up and 0% have a EC customs hold up. The document for USA is 12 pages long the EC one is 0 pages long.
I think your core reason for leaving resonates with millions of leavers. Whatever type of Brexit we end up with we can be assured the direction of travel regarding further EU integration will have been reversed, and will undo the surrender of powers that have taken place in the past generation. For many of the 17 million this alone will be cause for satisfaction. Some of the most ardent Europhiles fail to realise that the majority of voters on both sides are not overly concerned or understanding of the specifics, it is our broad relationship with the EU rather than the type of deal that matters most.
.
Yes I agree there are some ERG headbangers with very rigid views of our post Brexit future but with no plan of how to get there (I do think a minority of the ERG members have a plausible vision even if the outcome is unlikely). I do also think the 'people's vote' fanatics are cut from the same cloth, so perhaps I shouldn't have identified them as Europhiles They have no idea on what to ask, when to ask it, how to implement the result, if the public actually want to be asked the question and what the repercussions are. I fail to see how asking another question to the electorate so soon after the last one will do anything more than muddy the waters and lead to further division.
I don't want another referendum, but I think some of you that are so vociferously against one do so in the belief you have the answer you want. If the result had gone the other way with such a small percentage difference I doubt Farage et al would be saying "we have to respect the-will-o-the-people "
I'm sure he wouldn't have. However you cannot re-ask the question if you haven't even implemented the original answer. Incompetent negotiation, 'too hard, so why bother', Russians were being dodgy on facebook and 'the economy isn't booming' are far from sufficient reasons to ignore such a huge exercise in democracy. The argument would hold far more water if we were in a recession or if ballot boxes had mysteriously disappeared.
As it is we've got the bloke off BT Sport who's pretending he voted leave in order to attract a few thousand of his followers to support a second ref. The Prague Spring it ain't.
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
Getting into a turnip throwing contest with malcolm is not a sensible or productive activity.
No, but it is fun. Nationalism is a poisonous creed, and he rises to the bait every time, so I have no sympathy
Due to have some major bowel surgery at the RVI in Newcastle on Friday. Quite nervous but I’m in very good hands. My surgeon and other NHS staff have been/are fantastic.
I think your core reason for leaving resonates with millions of leavers. Whatever type of Brexit we end up with we can be assured the direction of travel regarding further EU integration will have been reversed, and will undo the surrender of powers that have taken place in the past generation. For many of the 17 million this alone will be cause for satisfaction. Some of the most ardent Europhiles fail to realise that the majority of voters on both sides are not overly concerned or understanding of the specifics, it is our broad relationship with the EU rather than the type of deal that matters most.
.
Yes I agree there are some ERG headbangers with very rigid views of our post Brexit future but with no plan of how to get there (I do think a minority of the ERG members have a plausible vision even if the outcome is unlikely). I do also think the 'people's vote' fanatics are cut from the same cloth, so perhaps I shouldn't have identified them as Europhiles They have no idea on what to ask, when to ask it, how to implement the result, if the public actually want to be asked the question and what the repercussions are. I fail to see how asking another question to the electorate so soon after the last one will do anything more than muddy the waters and lead to further division.
I don't want another referendum, but I think some of you that are so vociferously against one do so in the belief you have the answer you want. If the result had gone the other way with such a small percentage difference I doubt Farage et al would be saying "we have to respect the-will-o-the-people "
I'm sure he wouldn't have. However you cannot re-ask the question if you haven't even implemented the original answer. Incompetent negotiation, 'too hard, so why bother', Russians were being dodgy on facebook and 'the economy isn't booming' are far from sufficient reasons to ignore such a huge exercise in democracy. The argument would hold far more water if we were in a recession or if ballot boxes had mysteriously disappeared.
As it is we've got the bloke off BT Sport who's pretending he voted leave in order to attract a few thousand of his followers to support a second ref. The Prague Spring it ain't.
As I say, Mr Brom. I agree with you, I am not arguing for one, but I will point out the lack of credibility in those who oppose it as a possibility .
Good afternoon all. I see we're still in Neverendum land. Just in case you thought I'd abandoned the fray, it's mostly a matter of waiting until Salzburg and seeing what Jenny Foreigner has to say. The domestic frothery from the zealots on both sides is pretty much irrelevant.
PS All good wishes Gallowgate. Fingers crossed all goes well for you.
Re UK citizens marrying non-EU citizens and rights of return:
As with schools term time holiday prohibition, it's aimed at a certain segment of population. One can't clearly say that though so the policy is applied widely regardless of consequence. If civil servants apply rules in a subjective way there would be the usual complaints.
Isn't that what the primary purpose rule was for? Why hasn't it or something similar designed to deal with the particular problems of young girls of South East Asian origin being forced into marriage been reintroduced?
Because designing such a rule that catches the wrongdoers whilst ensuring genuine cases do not fall foul of it is extremely hard.
We had such a rule before 1997. Is there any evidence it didn't work? Wasn't the reason it was removed was because Labour wanted to suck up to some of its voters to make it easier for them to bring in distant family members?
I would not have thought it that hard to make the distinction between someone like Mrs Sandpit living with Mr Sandpit for a number of years, with a family etc and some 17 year old taken out of school and married to a distant cousin in Pakistan. It rather seems to me that when people say it is "hard" what they really mean is that it will make obvious what happens in some communities and that they don't what to make it obvious because that would upset some people.
Well quite. Call me naïve but I really shouldn’t need to get a visa for my wife to visit the U.K. each time we visit, she’s my wife and that should be enough. A couple of decades ago our marriage certificate would have been enough to get her a British passport.
Seems like the ERG have put forward a much saner solution to Northern Ireland than the ludicrous backstop. Let's hope it gets adopted and we can move on. Won't hold my breath.
It's not an alternative to the backstop. It's a proposal for what could be in a deal with the EU (which would obviate the need for a backstop, as would Chequers of course). Do keep up.
It's true that it's perfectly sane, albeit vague on the crucial point of issue:
- Initial full regulatory alignment, making goods unacceptable for sale in the Republic of Ireland equally unacceptable in Northern Ireland.
- Data-sharing and co-operation between authorities can raise suspected non-compliance or infringement speedily if regulations diverge
How can it be that DD didn't get agreement on this from our EU friends, if it's so easy?
Because Barnier would like us to keep NI in the Single Market and Customs Union and frustrate Brexit. May showed every step of the way she would fold so why should he agree to it.
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
Oh dear, are you another Thatcherite who has helped destroy her biggest legacy (the single market etc etc.)? The EU is a Thatcherite construct. It is why Corbyn hates it
You are right that it is, and no true Thatcherite should want to leave the Single Market lightly, especially when you have old style left wing state socialists in the wings ready and willing to take over.
Indeed. Simplistic analysis would suggest that because she made the Bruge speech she was anti-EU. She was a sceptic, but there is no evidence to suggest she wanted out, and it is difficult to image she would.
She almost certainly felt British interests were best served by putting constraints on what she called the ratchet. The single market and Eastern expansion were all part of that combined with regulation for freeing up competition (all largely opposed by the French). The EU of today is a Thatcherite construct. Now we are soon out it will become much less so. Corbyn is saying "rejoice at that news". Well done the Tory right
I would not have thought it that hard to make the distinction between someone like Mrs Sandpit living with Mr Sandpit for a number of years, with a family etc and some 17 year old taken out of school and married to a distant cousin in Pakistan. It rather seems to me that when people say it is "hard" what they really mean is that it will make obvious what happens in some communities and that they don't what to make it obvious because that would upset some people.
Well quite. Call me naïve but I really shouldn’t need to get a visa for my wife to visit the U.K. each time we visit, she’s my wife and that should be enough. A couple of decades ago our marriage certificate would have been enough to get her a British passport.
We have a net migration target. Making it harder for Brits to bring their spouses and families back to the UK is basically a double-win according to that stupid metric. Sorry you got caught up in it all, but that's the reality of Tory policy.
So it's taken India 71 years to repeal a colonial era act......and its Britain's fault....
I am not sure the British Empire wrote the Bible or the Koran. Not sure what the Hindu position (please excuse pun) on homosexuality is, but I don't thing the Raj wrote any of their holy books either
I would not have thought it that hard to make the distinction between someone like Mrs Sandpit living with Mr Sandpit for a number of years, with a family etc and some 17 year old taken out of school and married to a distant cousin in Pakistan. It rather seems to me that when people say it is "hard" what they really mean is that it will make obvious what happens in some communities and that they don't what to make it obvious because that would upset some people.
Well quite. Call me naïve but I really shouldn’t need to get a visa for my wife to visit the U.K. each time we visit, she’s my wife and that should be enough. A couple of decades ago our marriage certificate would have been enough to get her a British passport.
We have a net migration target. Making it harder for Brits to bring their spouses and families back to the UK is basically a double-win according to that stupid metric. Sorry you got caught up in it all, but that's the reality of Tory policy.
A net migration target has always seemed daft to me. But keeping out people who use forced marriages to get residency seems eminently sensible, indeed desirable, to me. The primary purpose rule was designed to do just that and some version of it should be reintroduced IMO. If properly designed and implemented it should not catch the Mrs Sandpits of this world.
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
It's interesting that the Brexit post mortem seems to be travelling back further into the mists of time. We've moved on from the failure of the Remain campaign to win and we're into why the government didn't plan for a Leave vote. Soon it will be why no-one considered the risk of a Leave vote before holding the referendum.
I blame the Romans. What have the Romans ever done for us?
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
That is way too logical for this place.
But surely, weren't we told "they need us more than we need them"?!!!!!!!!!!! They have even gone back on that. Bloody furriners
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
That is way too logical for this place.
But surely, weren't we told "they need us more than we need them"?!!!!!!!!!!! They have even gone back on that. Bloody furriners
I suspect they have some interest in continuing trading relations.
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
That is way too logical for this place.
But surely, weren't we told "they need us more than we need them"?!!!!!!!!!!! They have even gone back on that. Bloody furriners
I suspect they have some interest in continuing trading relations.
Of course, but we really need to drop the pretence, we are not that important as a trading partner to the EU or the US. It is why British policy for such a long time has been that it is in British interests to be part of a large trading block.
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
That is way too logical for this place.
What the last two years have shown is this: it is very easy indeed to criticise the status quo. Very easy to criticise the EU which has, for all its advantages, many faults. But criticising is one thing. Coming forward with a practical well thought out better alternative is quite something else. And that is where the Brexiteers, particularly the very ideological ones, have utterly failed.
The same might be said of Corbyn's Labour. Corbyn is very good at criticising many of the things which are wrong in today's society and he makes some very good points when doing so. But being against only gets you so far. Working out a viable alternative is very much harder and needs something much more substantial than simply saying that what you propose will be "fair" or "fairer" whatever those words might mean.
If I were to advise anyone interested in going into politics I would tell them to work out what they are for and to be able to explain this in something more than tired old cliches, rather than rant - however passionately and eloquently - about what they are against. And they ought to come up with some coherent examples of what they would implement - and how - and be able to show that they've thought through the consequences.
Far too much political debate seems to be at a 60,000 foot level ("we're in favour of freedom and fairness and sunny days") rather than at the practical down-to-earth level. There is above all a lack of substance amongst our politicians. Maybe we need a few think tanks to do, you know, thinking?
A net migration target has always seemed daft to me. But keeping out people who use forced marriages to get residency seems eminently sensible, indeed desirable, to me. The primary purpose rule was designed to do just that and some version of it should be reintroduced IMO. If properly designed and implemented it should not catch the Mrs Sandpits of this world.
Disagree - the primary purpose is the net migration target, and in discouraging the Sandpits from returning it is working exactly as intended.
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
Getting into a turnip throwing contest with malcolm is not a sensible or productive activity.
This one is so thick and unimaginative that it would be a waste of good turnips. Hopefully his nurse will up the meds and we will hear no more from it.
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
That is way too logical for this place.
But surely, weren't we told "they need us more than we need them"?!!!!!!!!!!! They have even gone back on that. Bloody furriners
I suspect they have some interest in continuing trading relations.
Of course, but we really need to drop the pretence, we are not that important as a trading partner to the EU or the US. It is why British policy for such a long time has been that it is in British interests to be part of a large trading block.
Do you know which country would be the largest export market for the EU after Brexit?
As the EU (mostly) call the shots, it's worth understanding their interest in Brexit. Which are twofold. Get the UK out of the European Union with the least damage to themselves. As far as possible ensure the inevitable costs of Brexit fall on the UK and not them. They will work with Chequers. It's sufficiently vague that they can also be vague about it and make no long term commitment off the back of it. The EU will be very un-vague about the withdrawal agreement, which contains the stuff they want, in particular about the Irish border.
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
That is way too logical for this place.
What the last two years have shown is this: it is very easy indeed to criticise the status quo. Very easy to criticise the EU which has, for all its advantages, many faults. But criticising is one thing. Coming forward with a practical well thought out better alternative is quite something else. And that is where the Brexiteers, particularly the very ideological ones, have utterly failed.
The same might be said of Corbyn's Labour. Corbyn is very good at criticising many of the things which are wrong in today's society and he makes some very good points when doing so. But being against only gets you so far. Working out a viable alternative is very much harder and needs something much more substantial than simply saying that what you propose will be "fair" or "fairer" whatever those words might mean.
If I were to advise anyone interested in going into politics I would tell them to work out what they are for and to be able to explain this in something more than tired old cliches, rather than rant - however passionately and eloquently - about what they are against. And they ought to come up with some coherent examples of what they would implement - and how - and be able to show that they've thought through the consequences.
Far too much political debate seems to be at a 60,000 foot level ("we're in favour of freedom and fairness and sunny days") rather than at the practical down-to-earth level. There is above all a lack of substance amongst our politicians. Maybe we need a few think tanks to do, you know, thinking?
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
Getting into a turnip throwing contest with malcolm is not a sensible or productive activity.
No, but it is fun. Nationalism is a poisonous creed, and he rises to the bait every time, so I have no sympathy
You really are a thick tw*t. No-one is rising to your bait moron, I am pissing myself laughing at your pathetic witless stupidity. Go squeeze your plooks or do your homework.
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
Getting into a turnip throwing contest with malcolm is not a sensible or productive activity.
This one is so thick and unimaginative that it would be a waste of good turnips. Hopefully his nurse will up the meds and we will hear no more from it.
For someone that questions other's intelligence it takes you along time to respond. I guess you must be one of the foot soldiers rather than closer up the chain of command to the Fuhrer? Waiting for orders perhaps, or just a bit slow?
I would not have thought it that hard to make the distinction between someone like Mrs Sandpit living with Mr Sandpit for a number of years, with a family etc and some 17 year old taken out of school and married to a distant cousin in Pakistan. It rather seems to me that when people say it is "hard" what they really mean is that it will make obvious what happens in some communities and that they don't what to make it obvious because that would upset some people.
Well quite. Call me naïve but I really shouldn’t need to get a visa for my wife to visit the U.K. each time we visit, she’s my wife and that should be enough. A couple of decades ago our marriage certificate would have been enough to get her a British passport.
We have a net migration target. Making it harder for Brits to bring their spouses and families back to the UK is basically a double-win according to that stupid metric. Sorry you got caught up in it all, but that's the reality of Tory policy.
What’s difficult to say, is that what should be simple policy choices have been made more diffcult by the behaviour of first and second generation immigrants to the UK, whereby they seek to use marriage as a vehicle to immigration, and in doing so seek to import alien cultural values to the UK. Yeah it’s crap to be caught up in that myself, but I’ll deal with it.
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
Getting into a turnip throwing contest with malcolm is not a sensible or productive activity.
This one is so thick and unimaginative that it would be a waste of good turnips. Hopefully his nurse will up the meds and we will hear no more from it.
For someone that questions other's intelligence it takes you along time to respond. I guess you must be one of the foot soldiers rather than closer up the chain of command to the Fuhrer? Waiting for orders perhaps, or just a bit slow?
Unlike juveniles , adults have to earn a living to pay for lowlife scumbags like you to get JSA and free lodgings. Don't spot that bus when you go out to play skipping ropes.
Osborne will come to be regarded as a hero of Brexit. without his cunning wheeze of targeting LD seats in 2015, Dave would never have had the majority to call a referendum. I agree that he sacrificed himself too is a bonus.
I am not sure what to think of Osborne. Cameron, OTOH, is the sort that gives "posh-boys" a bad rep.
My late father who was a Lib/LD voter used to talk about certain tory MP's having what he called a 'smug git' quality about them. Osborne had that by the bucket load. A none Tory MP with it is Keith Vaz
you have plenty to pick from for sure
"The alleged fiddler" doesn't look smug at all of course
Pray tell who are you referring to in your cretinous comment instead of being a nasty Tory coward?
You are now talking gibberish which is another symptom of fascists. No idea what you are talking about, but I guess if you are accusing me of cowardice you are suggesting you would like a fight, which again would beautifully fit with the stereotype? You really need to go and take a chill pill rather than drinking during the early afternoon.
Go away you half witted dullard.
Haha. More evidence. Nationalism is the philosophy of the dullard. A moron's creed that is probably mainly adhered to by those with sexual problems. A belief-set that is founded on the unsupported notion that "my nation is better than yours". At best, it is stupid at worst downright evil. You are in no position to accuse anyone of stupidity. Heil Salmond!
Getting into a turnip throwing contest with malcolm is not a sensible or productive activity.
No, but it is fun. Nationalism is a poisonous creed, and he rises to the bait every time, so I have no sympathy
You really are a thick tw*t. No-one is rising to your bait moron, I am pissing myself laughing at your pathetic witless stupidity. Go squeeze your plooks or do your homework.
You really are vivid in your comments today and I usually understand your Scots words but needed my wife, God bless her, to inform me that the English for plooks is spots or pimples.
Fair play to him, that’s a serious amount of weight he’s lost.
Amazing what a gastric band can do
It's difficult to lose that much weight without it affecting your appearance but Tom Watson seems to have managed it which is a great achievement.
Apparently he bathes in vinegar, which contracts the skin and thus avoids the excess folds seen on fat->skinny people.
Is that really a thing? The logistics of it must be quite difficult - where do you get the tens of litres that would be needed for each bath, can it be reused (yuck!) preferably not for food (double yuck!), how often is it required and how long for, etc.
Comments
I agree. It will be some sort of fudge, fair enough. But the direction of travel will have been halted. Gradually we can do things differently if we want (we may not want to in many areas).
Michael Collins is my hero here. He signed a fudge, and lost his life for it. But he was far more right than wrong in the long run.
There was planning for the outcome of the vote.
There was no planning for the delivery of unicorns
I would not have thought it that hard to make the distinction between someone like Mrs Sandpit living with Mr Sandpit for a number of years, with a family etc and some 17 year old taken out of school and married to a distant cousin in Pakistan. It rather seems to me that when people say it is "hard" what they really mean is that it will make obvious what happens in some communities and that they don't what to make it obvious because that would upset some people.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45495384
Or is the complaint that he didn't fill in the gaps in the Leave campaign's political aims, and tell them whether Brexit should mean EEA or Canada Plus or WTO? If so, is anyone seriously going to claim with a straight face that he would have been able to do without being utterly howled down by exactly the people who claim he should have done such planning?
My dual passport just makes travel easier. I am still living in the UK. I will get the full-on Brexit and, yes, I could move abroad, but why should I? This is where I have lived and worked and paid my taxes and where I had hoped to retire to.
Now I am wondering what sort of future faces me because no one seems to know. I have put in place as much as possible to mininize impacts on myself and my family so we have options that many others do not, but only thanks to my birthplace being where it was. Just the luck of the draw.
If the UK was wielding a fraction of the backbone Thatcher showed when she got the rebate he could and would agree to it.
As I understand it the QTS isn’t required for private schools or private tuition.
https://www.hospitalityandcateringnews.com/2018/09/jd-wetherspoon-replace-drinks-eu-producers-uk-non-eu-producers/
Politically he was hugely underprepared, largely not engaged believing his own hype that his popularity was enough to win the day.
You should not call a vote if losing is not an option.
He teaches Physics.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LarrySabato/status/1039849246458109952
Maggie's backbone was immeasurably strengthened by the fact that at the time she had a veto on the EU budget. Theresa May is not lacking backbone - she's 'a bloody difficult woman', don't forget - but she has neither a veto, nor a particularly strong negotiating position, nor a commons majority, nor the support of some of her own MPs.
How on earth anyone thinks that in these circumstances she can simply brush aside anything inconvenient is extraordinary.
In many ways, the Leave vote was a call to stop further integration until we have a say. Particularly after it is waved through by a the government of the day without a public vote. The great and the good won the Lisbon vote by not having one, thus winning the battle but not the war.
I don't hate Poles and Lithuanians, they're generally good Catholic lads and lasses, and like a drink. I'd be happy with Martians in any variety of green, if we decide we want them. if we distrust anyone, it's the governments. The ratchet effect as described by Mr Dancer is the problem. You can only go one way and all you are allowed to choose is the speed to some extent.
After Chemnitz I was expecting AfD to stall or go backwards now they will play the victim card
so could go either way
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/angriff-von-spd-abgeordnetem-afd-verlaesst-plenarsaal-15784281.html
Still, my main point stands, no-one before the referendum was worrying about any difficulty in the government triggering Article 50. It's a bit far-fetched to claim Cameron should have anticipated it, and in any case what difference would it have made if he had?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/london-loses-its-status-as-worlds-top-financial-centre-66pz7g0h6?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=newsletter_102&utm_medium=email&utm_content=102_News lunch 12.9.2018 (1)&CMP=TNLEmail_118918_4101839_102
I think the ERG is overplaying its hand, and I think Barnier is too.
All risk thereby no fudge and a lot of nuts.
Where I do, respectfully, part company, is that it is pointless. Hard yes, and being made more so, in my view by an EU that is unnecessarily scared that it will set off a domino effect, But preserving our right to decide for ourselves is vital, in my view.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/11/asia/british-empire-lgbt-rights-section-377-intl/index.html
https://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
We can see this like a Jenga puzzle. The EU needs to extract the UK brick without bringing the edifice down. The EU won't rearrange the bricks to accommodate the UK in another arrangement. Life for the discarded brick will be pretty lonely.
Longer term the EU has no interest in a partnership of equals with the UK. We therefore must choose a partnership of unequals or no partnership at all. The second probably isn't viable.
Trump's problem is among the white vote where the 21 point lead the GOP had in 2016 has been reduced to just 3 or 4 points.
These numbers would, if repeated at a GE, mean a big Democrat win but by comparison Johnson beat Goldwater 61-39 in 1964.
We do not specify the route on how goods that we ship to EC go. Thus they may or may not pass over the Irish border. You cannot have one rule for Ireland and another for France.
If we ship goods by say Fedex we complete all the paperwork here as normal. The trouble is that around 35% of the goods we ship to USA have a customs hold up and 0% have a EC customs hold up. The document for USA is 12 pages long the EC one is 0 pages long.
As it is we've got the bloke off BT Sport who's pretending he voted leave in order to attract a few thousand of his followers to support a second ref. The Prague Spring it ain't.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/12/2020-democrats-early-states-midterms-815792
Robert’s recent suggestion that they were putting together slates of loonies appears unfounded.
PS All good wishes Gallowgate. Fingers crossed all goes well for you.
https://www.groovypost.com/howto/disable-autoplay-videos-on-sites-in-google-chrome/
Which means I can't tell that's going to happen to other people!
She almost certainly felt British interests were best served by putting constraints on what she called the ratchet. The single market and Eastern expansion were all part of that combined with regulation for freeing up competition (all largely opposed by the French). The EU of today is a Thatcherite construct. Now we are soon out it will become much less so. Corbyn is saying "rejoice at that news". Well done the Tory right
https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/features/choose-your-own-brexit-an-interactive-fantasy-for-all-ages-20180912177209
"Suddenly your path is blocked by the Barnier, a terrifying creature with a foul stench of creamy soft cheese."
... or maybe not.
so having poked Orban, Juncker now wants to pick a fight with the Italians
http://www.lastampa.it/2018/09/12/esteri/juncker-e-la-telefonata-con-conte-allibito-dai-continui-attacchi-di-salvini-2ZIirzCeYlU6ERuZ8X6XvN/pagina.html
The same might be said of Corbyn's Labour. Corbyn is very good at criticising many of the things which are wrong in today's society and he makes some very good points when doing so. But being against only gets you so far. Working out a viable alternative is very much harder and needs something much more substantial than simply saying that what you propose will be "fair" or "fairer" whatever those words might mean.
If I were to advise anyone interested in going into politics I would tell them to work out what they are for and to be able to explain this in something more than tired old cliches, rather than rant - however passionately and eloquently - about what they are against. And they ought to come up with some coherent examples of what they would implement - and how - and be able to show that they've thought through the consequences.
Far too much political debate seems to be at a 60,000 foot level ("we're in favour of freedom and fairness and sunny days") rather than at the practical down-to-earth level. There is above all a lack of substance amongst our politicians. Maybe we need a few think tanks to do, you know, thinking?