I doubt he cares. He’s an unelected Eurocrat after all.
More to the point why do people think reaching out the young involves acting like a plonker online? Yes I know those millennial (I am technically one, but I really think 1986 barely counts) are all about those memes and instragram and all that, and we all enjoy a good laugh online, but young people don't need to be reached out like some other species in patronising fashion.
Yeah, ‘86 for me too but I also don’t feel like a millennial (I do enjoy a good meme though!)
Lots of people born in the late 70s have been using computers since they were 5 years old. There was an explosion in personal computer ownership around 1981/1982/1983. (In fact 1982 was the official Year of the Computer according to the British government).
Not round my way there wasn't! This isn't a four yorkshiremen claim, but virtually no one I knew had a PC until the late 90s.
I was born in 1975. We had a ZX81 in 1981, and a Spectrum in 1983. Trifling baubles by the standards of today, but amazing at the time. Most of my friends had a spectrum or equivalent too. Of course, they were primarily there to play games on, but most people could manage at least a vague understanding of how simple programmes worked.
People say they weren't very powerful, but in fact I think they had enough computing power to defeat about 90% of human chess players even in the early 1980s.
Rees Mogg still does not understand what a No Deal Brexit is, bless him. It's what happens if the UK does not pay . And, among other things, it does mean no planes landing or taking off.
"the money the EU believes it is owed".
Believes it is owed. So the EU can stop our planes on the basis of an invoice it has submitted for what it thinks it is due? Jeez.
Would the people who got us into this fucked up protection racket like to stand up and take responsibility?
Thought not.
The UK has agreed to pay a certain amount of money (just as it agreed to the NI backstop). If the UK now says it will not pay that money, the EU will not sign the deals necessary to allow a planned No Deal to take place.
The UK has agreed an amount of money to be paid if there is a withdrawal agreement.
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
What does Jennings have to do to get dropped? And Joe Denly, not exactly looking to the future, might as well have called up Ian Bell.
Someone ought to write a book or article on the subject of whatever happened to all the England cricketers from West Indian backgrounds. At one time they comprised about half the team, not that long ago in the scheme of things.
Can somebody enlighten me. In the event of a no-deal, no backstop outcome, presumably it's the EU who'll be insisting that there's a border? I mean, couldn't we just say the Good Friday Agreement means that we have to keep an open border with the republic, so if you, EU, want a border, it's up to you to erect it. (Although I can't imagine that hard-line Brexiteers want an open border, might have all those Johnny Foreigners sneaking in and getting the ferry from Belfast).
Under WTO rules we should police all of our borders, but I suspect we might drag our feet. The Customs Checks at Holyhead on the other hand may be a wonder to behold....
This is incorrect. The WTO says nothing of the sort. Under WTO rules, another WTO member could take us to arbitration if we were treating imports from, say, the RoI and the US differently under MFN. eg we were not checking RoI widgets at the border but checking US widgets.
And, of course, the same could be applied to the RoI == EUCU in terms of treatment of UK Vs US widgets. MFN equal treatment is the principle that prevents the border from simply being ignored.
Mr. Observer, that's not quite how I'd see it. The UK/May is seeking a deal, (apparently the EU wants one too). If that's agreed, the build-up steps also occur. If not, they don't.
Or, as one man said, nothing is agreed until everything's agreed.
If we have no deal, why would we voluntarily throw tens of billions at the EU? [Some money would still go their way, pensions liabilities, some previously announced commitments etc, but not £39bn].
How you, me or the UK government sees it is entirely immaterial. It's how the EU sees it that matters. We need them to play ball if the planes are to keep on flying.
Most Leavers only go to Furriner-land once a year so they won't be too worried until August, and the troops will all be home by Christmas anyway
Hartlepool is very nice, apparently. It may well be that one ex-pat PB Leaver will be making his home there once he returns to the Brexit heartlands.
Ah, is that the one that insists on inflicting his views on the benefits of British self harm from the comfort of a home in the antipodes?
It does seem embarrassing today of all days, and he still persists with the dishonesty of a peoples vote, rather than calling it a second referendum which it is
IF there is no deal, there is no provision to stop A50 or withdraw it. Two years plus one day after A50 is triggered, in the absence of any agreed Transitional Period, the UK will leave the European Union, simple.
After then, we can apply to join the EU if we wish but as a new member and on terms stipulated by the EU.
This is why the LD and REMAIN positions are so futile - all the wishing and wanting in the world won't stop A50. The best that can be achieved is a very long transition period or an A50 deal very close to existing membership (Non EU members can sign up to the SM and CU and indeed some have) aka BINO.
I don't doubt an extension of a few days or a week could be mutually agreed if agreement was close.
Actually it’s not clear whether we could unilaterally reverse our Article 50 withdrawal. The Scottish courts have TODAY referred that question to - wait for it - the European Court of Justice.
Should be interesting .....
The European Court of Justice decision on unilaterally reversing article 50 will take a few years no doubt.
No expedited process?
It's an interesting question, usually waved away with 'the drafter says it can' or 'political considerations would make sure the ECJ will say it can/it will be done before the ECJ rule'. The amusing part is even in the A50 case at the Supreme Court while both sides acceptable A50 was irrevocable, so the point was not looked in detail IIRC, one of the Justices did say that there was some opinion that it was.
There's speculation that it could be heard as soon as November.
Probably the Cabinet minister who was due to recision this weekend
The problem with MPs is they only tend to speak to their activists (who make up 0.000001% of population) and then pretend they have the ear of all their constituents
What does Jennings have to do to get dropped? And Joe Denly, not exactly looking to the future, might as well have called up Ian Bell.
Someone ought to write a book or article on the subject of whatever happened to all the England cricketers from West Indian backgrounds. At one time they comprised about half the team, not that long ago in the scheme of things.
What happened to West Indian cricket generally? They used to be invincible.
What does Jennings have to do to get dropped? And Joe Denly, not exactly looking to the future, might as well have called up Ian Bell.
Someone ought to write a book or article on the subject of whatever happened to all the England cricketers from West Indian backgrounds. At one time they comprised about half the team, not that long ago in the scheme of things.
What happened to West Indian cricket generally? They used to be invincible.
Basketball happened.
Basketball might be interesting to play but I don't know how anyone can watch it for more than five minutes.
Probably the Cabinet minister who was due to recision this weekend
Not sure I understand that
resign that should say. Laura K reported a strong rumour earlier.
That makes sense. Perhaps Donald Tusk has inadvertently ruined Mordaunt’s leadership bid.
More likely made an utter fool of himself and been part of a huge miscalculation resulting in TM speech today which will have gone a long way to bringing together the ERG and most of the party, apart from the ultra remainers, Soubry, Wollaston, Greening etc
Can somebody enlighten me. In the event of a no-deal, no backstop outcome, presumably it's the EU who'll be insisting that there's a border? I mean, couldn't we just say the Good Friday Agreement means that we have to keep an open border with the republic, so if you, EU, want a border, it's up to you to erect it. (Although I can't imagine that hard-line Brexiteers want an open border, might have all those Johnny Foreigners sneaking in and getting the ferry from Belfast).
Under WTO rules we should police all of our borders, but I suspect we might drag our feet. The Customs Checks at Holyhead on the other hand may be a wonder to behold....
This is incorrect. The WTO says nothing of the sort. Under WTO rules, another WTO member could take us to arbitration if we were treating imports from, say, the RoI and the US differently under MFN. eg we were not checking RoI widgets at the border but checking US widgets.
While that is true, just as non-tariff barriers are rather difficult to police under WTO rules, the same would very likely apply to tariff non-barriers...
Probably the Cabinet minister who was due to recision this weekend
Not sure I understand that
resign that should say. Laura K reported a strong rumour earlier.
That makes sense. Perhaps Donald Tusk has inadvertently ruined Mordaunt’s leadership bid.
More likely made an utter fool of himself and been part of a huge miscalculation resulting in TM speech today which will have gone a long way to bringing together the ERG and most of the party, apart from the ultra remainers, Soubry, Wollaston, Greening etc
I'm disappointed by how easily you get carried away with this jingoism without thinking ahead to where it leads.
Can somebody enlighten me. In the event of a no-deal, no backstop outcome, presumably it's the EU who'll be insisting that there's a border? I mean, couldn't we just say the Good Friday Agreement means that we have to keep an open border with the republic, so if you, EU, want a border, it's up to you to erect it. (Although I can't imagine that hard-line Brexiteers want an open border, might have all those Johnny Foreigners sneaking in and getting the ferry from Belfast).
Under WTO rules we should police all of our borders, but I suspect we might drag our feet. The Customs Checks at Holyhead on the other hand may be a wonder to behold....
This is incorrect. The WTO says nothing of the sort. Under WTO rules, another WTO member could take us to arbitration if we were treating imports from, say, the RoI and the US differently under MFN. eg we were not checking RoI widgets at the border but checking US widgets.
While that is true, just as non-tariff barriers are rather difficult to police under WTO rules, the same would very likely apply to tariff non-barriers...
I previously thought that May would under no circumstances take us to a position whereby a hard border could be a possibility. I still find it incredibly difficult to believe. Hence, for sanity to prevail*, it must be one of the following:
1) Chequers (plus ++ whatever) and it has been pre-agreed and this is all playing to the gallery on both sides; or 2) SM/CU/FoM for the UK; or 3) The EU's backstop with an Irish Sea dotted line.
What does Jennings have to do to get dropped? And Joe Denly, not exactly looking to the future, might as well have called up Ian Bell.
Someone ought to write a book or article on the subject of whatever happened to all the England cricketers from West Indian backgrounds. At one time they comprised about half the team, not that long ago in the scheme of things.
What happened to West Indian cricket generally? They used to be invincible.
Basketball happened.
Basketball might be interesting to play but I don't know how anyone can watch it for more than five minutes.
Now I love my sport, especially live, I pretty much willing to watch any sport contest....but basketball, oh jesus christ. I have been to NBA games and after you get over the fact of the freak show giants, it is repetitive boredom for the most part.
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
One might suggest it would take place amidst an atmosphere of incomplete or erroneous information.
What does Jennings have to do to get dropped? And Joe Denly, not exactly looking to the future, might as well have called up Ian Bell.
Someone ought to write a book or article on the subject of whatever happened to all the England cricketers from West Indian backgrounds. At one time they comprised about half the team, not that long ago in the scheme of things.
What happened to West Indian cricket generally? They used to be invincible.
I heard that a lot of youngsters are now playing Baseball instead as the potential money is so much better
My vague memory which could well be wrong is cricket's broadcasting rights were sold to satellite and 99 per cent of WI kids were left to watch American basketball on terrestrial TV.
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
There is no panacea. Arguments are only ever over when one side gives up arguing, and a second referendum is more likely to result in one side or the other giving up than imposing any kind of Brexit in the current circumstances.
1) Chequers (plus ++ whatever) and it has been pre-agreed and this is all playing to the gallery on both sides; or 2) SM/CU/FoM for the UK; or 3) The EU's backstop with an Irish Sea dotted line.
Percentages? After this week: 30:50:20.
An extra long transition perhaps, ie 2 short-term, and increasingly likely to be 2 long-term also as most people won't want any more Euro-drama.
I do not know why the US elected Trump but it is hardly an issue for me
I do not understand why a 2nd Presidential Election would be non-democratic when the first vote was taken amidst incomplete and often erroneous information. I also do not understand the lack of confidence by Trump advocates: if he is such a good President, he would surely win again
Probably the Cabinet minister who was due to recision this weekend
Not sure I understand that
resign that should say. Laura K reported a strong rumour earlier.
That makes sense. Perhaps Donald Tusk has inadvertently ruined Mordaunt’s leadership bid.
More likely made an utter fool of himself and been part of a huge miscalculation resulting in TM speech today which will have gone a long way to bringing together the ERG and most of the party, apart from the ultra remainers, Soubry, Wollaston, Greening etc
I'm disappointed by how easily you get carried away with this jingoism without thinking ahead to where it leads.
To be honest William, you are only disappointed because your beloved EU have made a huge miscalculation and their action yesterday turned me away from them. Before yesterday it was TM deal or a second referendum, but after witnessing the performance of the leaders it is now TM deal or no deal.
It is not jingoism to condemn the action of an organisation you do not agree with and seek to be subject to your own laws, control your immigration to suit the economy, (I am in favour of immigration and very pleased with TM confirmation today to EU citizens living here) and not to send billions of pounds to keep the excesses and unaccountable Junckers and his like in a life of luxury
It isn't a EU cabal, it is 27 democratic countries who think, quite correctly, that the UK government is being an arse. We are the ones being difficult here. It is a national embarrassment that is descending to humiliation that makes Suez look like our finest hour
Democratic, the EU? - you are having a laugh
The member states are democracies and the EU is more democratic than its critics sometimes give it credit for - though not as democratic as it should be. That said, if it *was* as democratic as it should be, those same critics would rail against an elected European government as a grossly overly powerful infringement on Britain's sovereignty.
By all measures it is very democratic. Like the sovereignty issue, it is another myth perpetrated on the gullible by the manipulative. It is considerably more democratic and accountable than the UK is. When I last looked the EU does not have a hereditary president or a House of Lords. It's officials are accountable to the democratically appointed heads of government through the Council of Ministers and its parliament is elected by PR. I would say that makes it about 2x as representative and accountable as the UK executive
Oh, nonsense. Britain's head of state has practically no political power and the Lords has little.
The EU commission is appointed and wields great power. Some of that is genuine civil servant stuff, and that's fair enough, but the College of Commissioners does a great deal more than administer and in any other equivalent political system would be fully accountable to the parliament (i.e. could be directly removed on a VoNC) and probably selected from and elected by it, consistent with majority support within the parliament.
It is fully accountable to the Council of Ministers, which are the elected heads of government. To pretend it is not democratic or unaccountable is either a lie or just downright ignorant. Incidentally, you clearly don't understand our bicameral legislature if you think the HoL has little power. You also undermine your own argument by saying " oh nonsense" when you clearly simply just don't agree or understand the detail
I suspect that D. Herdson has a greater knowledge on these matters than your good self. To pretend that the level of accountability you refer to in the last paragraph is in any way meanignful - well - go tell it to the marines is the only appropriate comment.
Rees Mogg still does not understand what a No Deal Brexit is, bless him. It's what happens if the UK does not pay . And, among other things, it does mean no planes landing or taking off.
"the money the EU believes it is owed".
Believes it is owed. So the EU can stop our planes on the basis of an invoice it has submitted for what it thinks it is due? Jeez.
Would the people who got us into this fucked up protection racket like to stand up and take responsibility?
Thought not.
The UK has agreed to pay a certain amount of money (just as it agreed to the NI backstop). If the UK now says it will not pay that money, the EU will not sign the deals necessary to allow a planned No Deal to take place.
The UK has agreed an amount of money to be paid if there is a withdrawal agreement.
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
Yep - only one country would fare worse than Ireland in a No Deal scenario.
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
There is no panacea. Arguments are only ever over when one side gives up arguing, and a second referendum is more likely to result in one side or the other giving up than imposing any kind of Brexit in the current circumstances.
If Leave were to win again I could see some remainers finally, reluctantly giving up, and if remain won some leavers who are wavering over all this chaos might also give up, but significant numbers? When there are people who have been fighting for it for decades?
I think you overestimate the likelihood it would resolve matters. It may still be worth trying, but it's still hugely problematic.
I am sorry if I have offended anyone - I will *try* to play nice from now on.
Anyway, I think a hard Brexit is inevitable. As others have stated time is short for any meaningful deal. Is there any mechanism where A50 can be extended?
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
One might suggest it would take place amidst an atmosphere of incomplete or erroneous information.
Very well put. Another referendum is not going to resolve the issue, it risks deepening divisions created by the first one and the campaign will inevitably see a blizzard of dubious and dishonest claims on both sides. And it will reduce a very complex and multi-faceted question which few people fully understand to a simple binary choice.
In short it would be a crazy idea. But, just at the moment, it is not clear that any alternative way forward, apart from a no deal leap off the cliff, exists.
Rees Mogg still does not understand what a No Deal Brexit is, bless him. It's what happens if the UK does not pay . And, among other things, it does mean no planes landing or taking off.
"the money the EU believes it is owed".
Believes it is owed. So the EU can stop our planes on the basis of an invoice it has submitted for what it thinks it is due? Jeez.
Would the people who got us into this fucked up protection racket like to stand up and take responsibility?
Thought not.
The UK has agreed to pay a certain amount of money (just as it agreed to the NI backstop). If the UK now says it will not pay that money, the EU will not sign the deals necessary to allow a planned No Deal to take place.
The UK has agreed an amount of money to be paid if there is a withdrawal agreement.
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
Yep - only one country would fare worse than Ireland in a No Deal scenario.
If there is no withdrawal agreement how much is owed?
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
There is no panacea. Arguments are only ever over when one side gives up arguing, and a second referendum is more likely to result in one side or the other giving up than imposing any kind of Brexit in the current circumstances.
If Leave were to win again I could see some remainers finally, reluctantly giving up, and if remain won some leavers who are wavering over all this chaos might also give up, but significant numbers? When there are people who have been fighting for it for decades?
I think you overestimate the likelihood it would resolve matters. It may still be worth trying, but it's still hugely problematic.
I think it's worth a try. There's a decent chance that during the campaign, opinion will break decisively one way or another to produce a more emphatic result.
Mr. kle4, irks me the way they've expanded the wanky millenial definition to include those born in the 80s.
Indeed, I was born in 82, I finished my A-level equivalent overseas in the southern hemisphere end of 1999 and started uni in 2000 so the millenium was a big moment for me. I received my exam results 31 Dec 1999 because of fears that the millenium bug could cause issues with the release of our results in January. When I was in High School (College) nobody in my class had a mobile phone. Nine months later at university everyone did.
But I never heard of the phrase millenial until I was already in my 30s, married and a parent. I don't consider myself one.
Mr. Observer, that's not quite how I'd see it. The UK/May is seeking a deal, (apparently the EU wants one too). If that's agreed, the build-up steps also occur. If not, they don't.
Or, as one man said, nothing is agreed until everything's agreed.
If we have no deal, why would we voluntarily throw tens of billions at the EU? [Some money would still go their way, pensions liabilities, some previously announced commitments etc, but not £39bn].
How you, me or the UK government sees it is entirely immaterial. It's how the EU sees it that matters. We need them to play ball if the planes are to keep on flying.
Most Leavers only go to Furriner-land once a year so they won't be too worried until August, and the troops will all be home by Christmas anyway
Hartlepool is very nice, apparently. It may well be that one ex-pat PB Leaver will be making his home there once he returns to the Brexit heartlands.
Ever been to Hartlepool? That sneer on your upper lip suggests not...
I am sorry if I have offended anyone - I will *try* to play nice from now on.
Anyway, I think a hard Brexit is inevitable. As others have stated time is short for any meaningful deal. Is there any mechanism where A50 can be extended?
I think your first sentence does you credit.
To be honest it really does.
I have been consistent in saying unnecessary language loses an argument and is a poor reflection on those using it.
Can somebody enlighten me. In the event of a no-deal, no backstop outcome, presumably it's the EU who'll be insisting that there's a border? I mean, couldn't we just say the Good Friday Agreement means that we have to keep an open border with the republic, so if you, EU, want a border, it's up to you to erect it. (Although I can't imagine that hard-line Brexiteers want an open border, might have all those Johnny Foreigners sneaking in and getting the ferry from Belfast).
Under WTO rules we should police all of our borders, but I suspect we might drag our feet. The Customs Checks at Holyhead on the other hand may be a wonder to behold....
This is incorrect. The WTO says nothing of the sort. Under WTO rules, another WTO member could take us to arbitration if we were treating imports from, say, the RoI and the US differently under MFN. eg we were not checking RoI widgets at the border but checking US widgets.
While that is true, just as non-tariff barriers are rather difficult to police under WTO rules, the same would very likely apply to tariff non-barriers...
I previously thought that May would under no circumstances take us to a position whereby a hard border could be a possibility. I still find it incredibly difficult to believe. Hence, for sanity to prevail*, it must be one of the following:
1) Chequers (plus ++ whatever) and it has been pre-agreed and this is all playing to the gallery on both sides; or 2) SM/CU/FoM for the UK; or 3) The EU's backstop with an Irish Sea dotted line.
Percentages? After this week: 30:50:20.
*not I appreciate a given.
I expect that you'll be disappointed if you expect any of these to actually happen. Especially option 3, it will never happen as even JC couldn't get it through the house of commons.
Probably the Cabinet minister who was due to recision this weekend
Not sure I understand that
Given that all MPs are being deluged by people urging them to back the Peoples Vote campaign, funny how she forgot to mention them as well. It's almost like MPs are good at hearing what they want to hear, and then telling everyone about what they are hearing. I'm sure Anna Soubry / David Lammy / Caroline Lucas / Tom Brake will give a different picture of what their constituents are saying...
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
There is no panacea. Arguments are only ever over when one side gives up arguing, and a second referendum is more likely to result in one side or the other giving up than imposing any kind of Brexit in the current circumstances.
If Leave were to win again I could see some remainers finally, reluctantly giving up, and if remain won some leavers who are wavering over all this chaos might also give up, but significant numbers? When there are people who have been fighting for it for decades?
I think you overestimate the likelihood it would resolve matters. It may still be worth trying, but it's still hugely problematic.
I think it's worth a try. There's a decent chance that during the campaign, opinion will break decisively one way or another to produce a more emphatic result.
I expect Corbyn will see it off this weekend and that would be the end of that
Probably the Cabinet minister who was due to recision this weekend
Not sure I understand that
Given that all MPs are being deluged by people urging them to back the Peoples Vote campaign, funny how she forgot to mention them as well. It's almost like MPs are good at hearing what they want to hear, and then telling everyone about what they are hearing. I'm sure Anna Soubry / David Lammy / Caroline Lucas / Tom Brake will give a different picture of what their constituents are saying...
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
There is no panacea. Arguments are only ever over when one side gives up arguing, and a second referendum is more likely to result in one side or the other giving up than imposing any kind of Brexit in the current circumstances.
If Leave were to win again I could see some remainers finally, reluctantly giving up, and if remain won some leavers who are wavering over all this chaos might also give up, but significant numbers? When there are people who have been fighting for it for decades?
I think you overestimate the likelihood it would resolve matters. It may still be worth trying, but it's still hugely problematic.
I think it's worth a try. There's a decent chance that during the campaign, opinion will break decisively one way or another to produce a more emphatic result.
I expect Corbyn will see it off this weekend and that would be the end of that
The option will be kept open. Starmer is driving policy on this and he does not want an overt commitment to a second referendum because he thinks it would push the ERG toward supporting whatever deal May eventually comes up with. Labour's official position will continue to be that if Mays deal is rejected in the Commons there should be a general election. But since Labour does not have the power to force a general election and the Tories are very unlikely to agree to one in the chaos of no deal the likelihood is that at that point another referendum will become the only viable alternative to a cliff edge Brexit. And Labour will then support it.
I am sorry if I have offended anyone - I will *try* to play nice from now on.
Rubbish. PB is interesting because it has all flavours of debate and yours is just as valid as anyone else's. Keep at it.
I will still keep is tasty but saying all Leavers are ugly was pushing it too much. Maybe?
Brexit is a really emotive subject - it divides the country as it divides this blog. I honestly believe that despite its' flaws we have made the wrong decision to leave the EU.
We have made a democratic decision to leave the EU. One of the reasons we made that decision is because politicians were reluctant to allow us to make that decision before.
The EU doesn't want us to go, but they have no interest in changing any EU rules to keep us in. They are trying to influence us without appearing to do so.
Sometimes, they go too far and Mrs May has decided they have this time. If it comes to us appearing to bend the knee to bullies, the response will be to her advantage. For once she's made a sound political decision. But I suspect the EU will row back a little.
A deal will only be done when the deadline is reached. The preliminaries are merely sound and fury.
Rees Mogg still does not understand what a No Deal Brexit is, bless him. It's what happens if the UK does not pay . And, among other things, it does mean no planes landing or taking off.
"the money the EU believes it is owed".
Believes it is owed. So the EU can stop our planes on the basis of an invoice it has submitted for what it thinks it is due? Jeez.
Would the people who got us into this fucked up protection racket like to stand up and take responsibility?
Thought not.
The UK has agreed to pay a certain amount of money (just as it agreed to the NI backstop). If the UK now says it will not pay that money, the EU will not sign the deals necessary to allow a planned No Deal to take place.
The UK has agreed an amount of money to be paid if there is a withdrawal agreement.
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
Yep - only one country would fare worse than Ireland in a No Deal scenario.
£39Bn would pay for a lot of corporation tax cuts.
No deal modelling assumes the Uk would do nothing to reduce the impact. A fair guess if the dolt Hammond is at the tiller but a more dynamic CotE like Gove would be more pro-active.
In 5 years it would be like Thactherism take II - the Uk leaving the luddite EU in its wake if it chooses the right path.
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
I don't think recommending that everyone revel in national humiliation is a winning political strategy.
Rees Mogg still does not understand what a No Deal Brexit is, bless him. It's what happens if the UK does not pay . And, among other things, it does mean no planes landing or taking off.
"the money the EU believes it is owed".
Believes it is owed. So the EU can stop our planes on the basis of an invoice it has submitted for what it thinks it is due? Jeez.
Would the people who got us into this fucked up protection racket like to stand up and take responsibility?
Thought not.
The UK has agreed to pay a certain amount of money (just as it agreed to the NI backstop). If the UK now says it will not pay that money, the EU will not sign the deals necessary to allow a planned No Deal to take place.
The UK has agreed an amount of money to be paid if there is a withdrawal agreement.
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
Yep - only one country would fare worse than Ireland in a No Deal scenario.
£39Bn would pay for a lot of corporation tax cuts.
No deal modelling assumes the Uk would do nothing to reduce the impact. A fair guess if the dolt Hammond is at the tiller but a more dynamic CotE like Gove would be more pro-active.
In 5 years it would be like Thactherism take II - the Uk leaving the luddite EU in its wake if it chooses the right path.
A 10 year project, I think - rather like the aftermath of 2008. And that assumes it doesn't let Corbyn in.
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
As I said before I like Tusk - he actually comes across as human - flaws and all. Macron and Merkel seem far too robotic to me (a bit like May actually).
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
I don't think recommending that everyone revel in national humiliation is a winning political strategy.
Why? The Remainers reckon they'll cruise a People's Vote after spending two years winning over voters with the exact same strategy.
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. The same way lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
I am sorry if I have offended anyone - I will *try* to play nice from now on.
Rubbish. PB is interesting because it has all flavours of debate and yours is just as valid as anyone else's. Keep at it.
I will still keep is tasty but saying all Leavers are ugly was pushing it too much. Maybe?
Brexit is a really emotive subject - it divides the country as it divides this blog. I honestly believe that despite its' flaws we have made the wrong decision to leave the EU.
Lol - dunno about leavers but I voted Remain and of course i am absolutely fabulous!
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. The same way lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. Same way of lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
Yep, in the press conference on Wednesday Dave Lewis quoted the ‘better to cannibalise yourself than have others do it’ line from Steve Jobs...
As for store locations they are mainly either sites where Tesco never opened or where the current Tesco format isn't working - so not rich areas as its a discount brand to compete with Aldi and Lidl...
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
I don't think recommending that everyone revel in national humiliation is a winning political strategy.
Why? The Remainers reckon they'll cruise a People's Vote after spending two years winning over voters with the exact same strategy.
First lets have the #peoplesvote passed by Parliament, then the positive pro EU campaign.
Rees Mogg still does not understand what a No Deal Brexit is, bless him. It's what happens if the UK does not pay . And, among other things, it does mean no planes landing or taking off.
"the money the EU believes it is owed".
Believes it is owed. So the EU can stop our planes on the basis of an invoice it has submitted for what it thinks it is due? Jeez.
Would the people who got us into this fucked up protection racket like to stand up and take responsibility?
Thought not.
The UK has agreed to pay a certain amount of money (just as it agreed to the NI backstop). If the UK now says it will not pay that money, the EU will not sign the deals necessary to allow a planned No Deal to take place.
The UK has agreed an amount of money to be paid if there is a withdrawal agreement.
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
Yep - only one country would fare worse than Ireland in a No Deal scenario.
£39Bn would pay for a lot of corporation tax cuts.
No deal modelling assumes the Uk would do nothing to reduce the impact. A fair guess if the dolt Hammond is at the tiller but a more dynamic CotE like Gove would be more pro-active.
In 5 years it would be like Thactherism take II - the Uk leaving the luddite EU in its wake if it chooses the right path.
No Deal means No Deal. It means planes won’t fly. Corporation tax cuts will make no difference in such circumstances. The £39 billion will be needed for the extra unemployment benefits.
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
I don't think recommending that everyone revel in national humiliation is a winning political strategy.
Why? The Remainers reckon they'll cruise a People's Vote after spending two years winning over voters with the exact same strategy.
First lets have the #peoplesvote passed by Parliament, then the positive pro EU campaign.
I still think Leave would win it. Anything positive you can say about the EU can be trumped by the fact they've starved Greece to death to save their grand project. The EU was, and remains, a difficult sell.
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. The same way lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
Chatteris, Immingham...
No - no relationship to Brexit at all.
correlation does not imply causation....
Firstly, they had a mothballed store there...and I am going to go out on a limb here and say they target areas will poorer folk, which also happened to vote Brexit. But as you have no idea about places like Stoke you wouldn't understand these kind of things.
My issue with the idea was never that it would be non-democratic or who would win, but why it would be seen to solve the problem since to state it would end all argument over things would be complete fiction. I'm persuaded to support it now as it may be the lesser evil given the utter chaos we currently have, but what he points out isn't obvious because it ignores that getting one is not simple, nor would it be the panacea that too many of its adherents pretend it would be, given people still cannot even agree what the question would be.
One might suggest it would take place amidst an atmosphere of incomplete or erroneous information.
Very well put. Another referendum is not going to resolve the issue, it risks deepening divisions created by the first one and the campaign will inevitably see a blizzard of dubious and dishonest claims on both sides. And it will reduce a very complex and multi-faceted question which few people fully understand to a simple binary choice.
In short it would be a crazy idea. But, just at the moment, it is not clear that any alternative way forward, apart from a no deal leap off the cliff, exists.
It is also now longer since the referendum (820 days) than the interval between the 2015 and 2017 General Elections (763 days).
Of course, the referendum result hasn't been completely actioned - we have issued Article 50, passed legislation on it, and engaged in extensive negotiation and clarified a lot of what is and is not possible, and ascertained the plausible shapes of what Leave actually means in practice, but we haven't yet left. Some might say that simply because the situation we do have today is rather different to what was campaigned upon, and that the majority for it was very narrow aren't valid reasons to hold another referendum.
Then again, it could be argued that only a fraction of the 2015 Conservative manifesto had been actioned; chunks of it had, but huge swathes of it had not. The situation had only changed to the extent that Brexit had passed (the referendum for which was, after all, one of those many things promised in the said manifesto), but it was argued that the situation was rather different to that campaigned upon in 2015 and the majority won under that 2015 manifesto was very narrow were valid reasons to hold another election.
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
I don't think recommending that everyone revel in national humiliation is a winning political strategy.
Why? The Remainers reckon they'll cruise a People's Vote after spending two years winning over voters with the exact same strategy.
First lets have the #peoplesvote passed by Parliament, then the positive pro EU campaign.
It's that kind of talk that got us in this mess in the first place. There have been no outlets in both the Media or Political Parties for the kind of positive message about the EU. There have certainly been none that got any traction (sorry LIb Dems). It became far to easy for politicians and the media to bash the EU and that made it possible for the Brexiteers to make the policy.
Whatever happens I can't see anyone putting the Pro-EU case forward effectively because
1) Nobody has been able to do it successfully before 2) The people that would need to be convinced (the older folks who voted brexit) are still in favour of Brexit
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. The same way lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
Chatteris, Immingham...
No - no relationship to Brexit at all.
correlation does not imply causation....
Firstly, they had a mothballed store there...and I am going to go out on a limb here and say they target areas will poorer folk, which also happened to vote Brexit. But as you have no idea about places like Stoke you wouldn't understand these kind of things.
Both had c70% Leave votes. You think that's by chance?
Surely he is making the point you make all the time about how we don't understand the EU position on things. It naturally follows they don't understand our positions, since they expect us to break out red lines just as we hope they will break theirs, neither understanding the redness.
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. The same way lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
Chatteris, Immingham...
No - no relationship to Brexit at all.
correlation does not imply causation....
Firstly, they had a mothballed store there...and I am going to go out on a limb here and say they target areas will poorer folk, which also happened to vote Brexit. But as you have no idea about places like Stoke you wouldn't understand these kind of things.
Both had c70% Leave votes. You think that's by chance?
Are you calling the Tesco's CEO a liar?
Also, from 4 years ago...
“We need a supermarket; we didn’t particularly want Tesco,” says Christine Colbert, a local councillor who points to the hoardings done out in Tesco colours – a blue fence with a red trim. “People tend to want Asda or Morrisons.
A product very similar to camembert should be well possible to make from Cornwall, the climate and land are not so dissimilar to Normandy... Certainly more similar than the err Californian variety I expect. One thing we've noted here, grapes in supermarkets are miles better than those sold in England.
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. The same way lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
Chatteris, Immingham...
No - no relationship to Brexit at all.
correlation does not imply causation....
Firstly, they had a mothballed store there...and I am going to go out on a limb here and say they target areas will poorer folk, which also happened to vote Brexit. But as you have no idea about places like Stoke you wouldn't understand these kind of things.
Both had c70% Leave votes. You think that's by chance?
Are you calling the Tesco's CEO a liar?
Of course not. Unlike you I can differentiate between the idea and the implementation.
But then, since you choose to opine on my knowledge of locations without troubling to check with me first (a curious tic that more than one Leaver seems to have), it's hardly surprising that you're incapable of such nuance.
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
I don't think recommending that everyone revel in national humiliation is a winning political strategy.
Why? The Remainers reckon they'll cruise a People's Vote after spending two years winning over voters with the exact same strategy.
First lets have the #peoplesvote passed by Parliament, then the positive pro EU campaign.
It's that kind of talk that got us in this mess in the first place. There have been no outlets in both the Media or Political Parties for the kind of positive message about the EU. There have certainly been none that got any traction (sorry LIb Dems). It became far to easy for politicians and the media to bash the EU and that made it possible for the Brexiteers to make the policy.
Whatever happens I can't see anyone putting the Pro-EU case forward effectively because
1) Nobody has been able to do it successfully before 2) The people that would need to be convinced (the older folks who voted brexit) are still in favour of Brexit
The EU is a hard-sell but no-one on the Remain side even tried. Lots of (good) things that we now take for granted started life in the EU. The narrative was set by the Leave campaign right through the campaign.
Sounds like he's a bit worried he broke the EU....
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
The EU have every right to take the piss out of May. She's crap.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
I don't think recommending that everyone revel in national humiliation is a winning political strategy.
Why? The Remainers reckon they'll cruise a People's Vote after spending two years winning over voters with the exact same strategy.
Certainly many of the project fear claims have not stood the test of time. But the leavers "cake and eat it" claims have been even more comprehensively debunked - the Brexit world they promised has proved to be complete fantasy. And they have failed to come up with a realistic way forward.
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
Once we get past the faux indignation and the outrage and enjoy our little burst of aggrieved patriotism, what then?
A deal will still be done and we will need to make some concessions and one day May (or whoever) will have to stand up in an interview or in the Commons and explain why we had to do what we did.
Alternatively, we can jump on the outrage train and make the short trip to "No Deal City" and see how much we enjoy life there.
Politics is the art of compromise, not of walking into a room brandishing "a deal" and assuming everyone will simply go along with it. It isn't walking "naked into the debating chamber" either but it is about recognising what's possible and what isn't and when it's about playing to the crowd and when it's about making the tough decisions which are necessary for a deal.
May today is all about playing to the crowd - leadership is about the tough decisions.
Rees Mogg still does not understand what a No Deal Brexit is, bless him. It's what happens if the UK does not pay . And, among other things, it does mean no planes landing or taking off.
"the money the EU believes it is owed".
Believes it is owed. So the EU can stop our planes on the basis of an invoice it has submitted for what it thinks it is due? Jeez.
Would the people who got us into this fucked up protection racket like to stand up and take responsibility?
Thought not.
The UK has agreed to pay a certain amount of money (just as it agreed to the NI backstop). If the UK now says it will not pay that money, the EU will not sign the deals necessary to allow a planned No Deal to take place.
The UK has agreed an amount of money to be paid if there is a withdrawal agreement.
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
Yep - only one country would fare worse than Ireland in a No Deal scenario.
£39Bn would pay for a lot of corporation tax cuts.
No deal modelling assumes the Uk would do nothing to reduce the impact. A fair guess if the dolt Hammond is at the tiller but a more dynamic CotE like Gove would be more pro-active.
In 5 years it would be like Thactherism take II - the Uk leaving the luddite EU in its wake if it chooses the right path.
No Deal means No Deal. It means planes won’t fly. Corporation tax cuts will make no difference in such circumstances. The £39 billion will be needed for the extra unemployment benefits.
I get bored with saying this, but it does not mean planes will not fly.
I do appreciate that repeating this crap often serves a purpose though.
It looks like Jack's is intended to be Brexit Tesco's. I wonder whether they are planning a Remain version in due course.
Is a total bollocks reading of the situation. Jack's is Tesco's attempt at trying to compete with Aldi and Lidl, Brexit or no Brexit. The same way lots of companies have several brands to target different segments of the market e.g. Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic.
Chatteris, Immingham...
No - no relationship to Brexit at all.
correlation does not imply causation....
Firstly, they had a mothballed store there...and I am going to go out on a limb here and say they target areas will poorer folk, which also happened to vote Brexit. But as you have no idea about places like Stoke you wouldn't understand these kind of things.
Both had c70% Leave votes. You think that's by chance?
Are you calling the Tesco's CEO a liar?
Of course not. Unlike you I can differentiate between the idea and the implementation.
But then, since you choose to opine on my knowledge of locations without troubling to check with me first (a curious tic that more than one Leaver seems to have), it's hardly surprising that you're incapable of such nuance.
And I have just linked to 4 years ago, when locals were saying they wanted a budget supermarket.
So Tesco's have an idea for a budget supermarket before Brexit to combat Aldi / Lidl and they have a mothballed store in a location where the local population who have said they actually want a budget supermarket (way before Brexit), but it them opening there is because of Brexit....
They are getting walloped by Aldi / Lidl / Asda / Morrisons amongst poorer demographics, they would be absolutely idiotic not to at least try to do this. Opening in a store you built over 4 years ago and not been able to operate is the logical first step.
I am not a leaver, but it is clear you are deaf when it comes to certain types of places.
They are hard right English nationalists. You won’t have to put up with it too much longer! Hopefully, the break-up of the UK will finally help my fellow countrymen to understand it isn’t WW2 anymore and Cod Churchillism doesn’t solve 21st century problems. I doubt it, though.
I suspect Tusk, Macron and others have been shocked by the reaction and I very much doubt many EU nations are happy with the reporting of their humiliation of TM
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
Once we get past the faux indignation and the outrage and enjoy our little burst of aggrieved patriotism, what then?
A deal will still be done and we will need to make some concessions and one day May (or whoever) will have to stand up in an interview or in the Commons and explain why we had to do what we did.
Alternatively, we can jump on the outrage train and make the short trip to "No Deal City" and see how much we enjoy life there.
Politics is the art of compromise, not of walking into a room brandishing "a deal" and assuming everyone will simply go along with it. It isn't walking "naked into the debating chamber" either but it is about recognising what's possible and what isn't and when it's about playing to the crowd and when it's about making the tough decisions which are necessary for a deal.
May today is all about playing to the crowd - leadership is about the tough decisions.
Again I think you are being very simplistic about things and unfair on May - she left making a decision very late, too late in fact, and deserves much criticism, nor do I see her statement today as being more than trying to save some face, but to suggest she has not attempted to make a deal and has not made tough decisions is, I feel, unfair and unreasonable - indeed, she has faced down significant numbers of her own party in doing so, while you make it seem like she has been taking an easy path out of laziness. May's offer was clearly still not enough for the EU, but you seriously think she went in with something most of her party already hated when she could easily have been 'tough' and gone in with a lot more concessions? She made plenty a tough call just cobbling together the offer she did make.
She wasn't bluffing about not being able to go much further. Why is it unfair for her to have redlines but not unfair for the EU to have red lines? It's fair for both. Someone will need to blink, and show the lines are not so red after all, and I am inclined to think it will be us, with or without May, but I have been surprised how atypically simplistic you have been on this issue.
Comments
If there is no agreement, how much is owed?
Separately one EU member (Ireland) would very rapidly feel the impact of the lack of a planned no-deal, given their reliance on the land bridge.
https://twitter.com/richardhaass/status/1043090347621076992?s=21
https://twitter.com/CookPolitical/status/1043107827684917248
1) Chequers (plus ++ whatever) and it has been pre-agreed and this is all playing to the gallery on both sides; or
2) SM/CU/FoM for the UK; or
3) The EU's backstop with an Irish Sea dotted line.
Percentages? After this week: 30:50:20.
*not I appreciate a given.
One might suggest it would take place amidst an atmosphere of incomplete or erroneous information.
It is not jingoism to condemn the action of an organisation you do not agree with and seek to be subject to your own laws, control your immigration to suit the economy, (I am in favour of immigration and very pleased with TM confirmation today to EU citizens living here) and not to send billions of pounds to keep the excesses and unaccountable Junckers and his like in a life of luxury
I think you overestimate the likelihood it would resolve matters. It may still be worth trying, but it's still hugely problematic.
https://twitter.com/thedeadauthor/status/1042832087793975297
In short it would be a crazy idea. But, just at the moment, it is not clear that any alternative way forward, apart from a no deal leap off the cliff, exists.
But I never heard of the phrase millenial until I was already in my 30s, married and a parent. I don't consider myself one.
I have been consistent in saying unnecessary language loses an argument and is a poor reflection on those using it.
Well done, that reflects well on you.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/09/21/labour-cant-risk-backing-second-referendum-pm-rallies-public/
https://twitter.com/FranceintheUK/status/1043157181485539328
I suspect the word 'cherry picking' may well cease to be used again
Brexit is a really emotive subject - it divides the country as it divides this blog. I honestly believe that despite its' flaws we have made the wrong decision to leave the EU.
The EU doesn't want us to go, but they have no interest in changing any EU rules to keep us in. They are trying to influence us without appearing to do so.
Sometimes, they go too far and Mrs May has decided they have this time. If it comes to us appearing to bend the knee to bullies, the response will be to her advantage. For once she's made a sound political decision. But I suspect the EU will row back a little.
A deal will only be done when the deadline is reached. The preliminaries are merely sound and fury.
Lolza.
No deal modelling assumes the Uk would do nothing to reduce the impact. A fair guess if the dolt Hammond is at the tiller but a more dynamic CotE like Gove would be more pro-active.
In 5 years it would be like Thactherism take II - the Uk leaving the luddite EU in its wake if it chooses the right path.
And we shouldn't get tetchy about being humiliated. It's all par for the course. The French - particularly Macron - hate us.
We'd be taking the piss out of them if the shoe was on the other foot.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/21/tesco-jacks-little-englandism-cornish-camembert-jacks
And that assumes it doesn't let Corbyn in.
No - no relationship to Brexit at all.
As for store locations they are mainly either sites where Tesco never opened or where the current Tesco format isn't working - so not rich areas as its a discount brand to compete with Aldi and Lidl...
But who would lead Remain? Alastair Campbell and Blair? Gina Miller and Adonis? Sturgeon and Clegg? Ruth Davidson?
It would pull politics in all directions. And I think Leave would win it. Then things would be really amusing.
Firstly, they had a mothballed store there...and I am going to go out on a limb here and say they target areas will poorer folk, which also happened to vote Brexit. But as you have no idea about places like Stoke you wouldn't understand these kind of things.
https://inews.co.uk/news/consumer/everything-you-need-to-know-about-jacks-tesco/
Of course, the referendum result hasn't been completely actioned - we have issued Article 50, passed legislation on it, and engaged in extensive negotiation and clarified a lot of what is and is not possible, and ascertained the plausible shapes of what Leave actually means in practice, but we haven't yet left. Some might say that simply because the situation we do have today is rather different to what was campaigned upon, and that the majority for it was very narrow aren't valid reasons to hold another referendum.
Then again, it could be argued that only a fraction of the 2015 Conservative manifesto had been actioned; chunks of it had, but huge swathes of it had not. The situation had only changed to the extent that Brexit had passed (the referendum for which was, after all, one of those many things promised in the said manifesto), but it was argued that the situation was rather different to that campaigned upon in 2015 and the majority won under that 2015 manifesto was very narrow were valid reasons to hold another election.
Both sides can argue their case, I feel.
Whatever happens I can't see anyone putting the Pro-EU case forward effectively because
1) Nobody has been able to do it successfully before
2) The people that would need to be convinced (the older folks who voted brexit) are still in favour of Brexit
https://twitter.com/stevedouble/status/1043154733404323842
Also, from 4 years ago...
“We need a supermarket; we didn’t particularly want Tesco,” says Christine Colbert, a local councillor who points to the hoardings done out in Tesco colours – a blue fence with a red trim. “People tend to want Asda or Morrisons.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/oct/03/tesco-expansion-policy-hold-chatteris-ghost-store
So way before Brexit, locals were saying hey we want a budget supermarket....and Tesco's have gone and given them one.
A product very similar to camembert should be well possible to make from Cornwall, the climate and land are not so dissimilar to Normandy... Certainly more similar than the err Californian variety I expect. One thing we've noted here, grapes in supermarkets are miles better than those sold in England.
But then, since you choose to opine on my knowledge of locations without troubling to check with me first (a curious tic that more than one Leaver seems to have), it's hardly surprising that you're incapable of such nuance.
A deal will still be done and we will need to make some concessions and one day May (or whoever) will have to stand up in an interview or in the Commons and explain why we had to do what we did.
Alternatively, we can jump on the outrage train and make the short trip to "No Deal City" and see how much we enjoy life there.
Politics is the art of compromise, not of walking into a room brandishing "a deal" and assuming everyone will simply go along with it. It isn't walking "naked into the debating chamber" either but it is about recognising what's possible and what isn't and when it's about playing to the crowd and when it's about making the tough decisions which are necessary for a deal.
May today is all about playing to the crowd - leadership is about the tough decisions.
I do appreciate that repeating this crap often serves a purpose though.
So Tesco's have an idea for a budget supermarket before Brexit to combat Aldi / Lidl and they have a mothballed store in a location where the local population who have said they actually want a budget supermarket (way before Brexit), but it them opening there is because of Brexit....
They are getting walloped by Aldi / Lidl / Asda / Morrisons amongst poorer demographics, they would be absolutely idiotic not to at least try to do this. Opening in a store you built over 4 years ago and not been able to operate is the logical first step.
I am not a leaver, but it is clear you are deaf when it comes to certain types of places.
She wasn't bluffing about not being able to go much further. Why is it unfair for her to have redlines but not unfair for the EU to have red lines? It's fair for both. Someone will need to blink, and show the lines are not so red after all, and I am inclined to think it will be us, with or without May, but I have been surprised how atypically simplistic you have been on this issue.
The Conservatives are not far right English nationalists. What's your evidence for that?