"If Flake flips"! Quite amusing that you could write that in all seriousness on a political site. (I suspect it was with an eye on the pun mind. On some massive PB green shield stamps type scheme that'd be some free tumblers.)
Sounds like Trump and Graham will go for the short FBI investigation. I guess its up to McConnell, but he'll want Flake's vote so FBI investigation -> Senate vote in 1 week.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
"Surely there's a better Option?", "Share Options: Why we should be exercised"
To be honest if you write a poor article no-one will care, and if you write a great one then the title won't hold it back.
Perhaps "Orange Elephants spotted on the Moon" will do the trick?
What you should be most concerned about is that we know what you're going to say. I've no doubt there are some insights beyond the obvious - I think if any of them are title worthy then that'd be the way forwards.
For what it's worth I nearly like your videos, but not just there yet.
Edit:Actually on reflection your worst reward works ok, perhaps 'poor reward' is better. All the above applies though
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
The only risk I see is if the FBI do a real deep dive on him and produce a file saying Kavanaugh got blind drunk repeatedly as a student contradicting his testimony.
If they just investigate the attempted rape then he'll not have any problems as it is a she said he said situation that no jury in the land would convict on.
Isabel Hardman is well worth a follow for Tory news and also means you can get ready for pile-in to defend her from misogynists and abusers."cocaine" is involved at the moment.It is important to remember the studies of the fishes in the river showed the Palace of Westminster has the highest concentration in the whole of Europe.The cocaine seized is now at least 85% purity more deaths,more trips to A &E,more unpredictable paranoid behaviour.The reference to cocaine shows the failure of prohibition and drug policy.
Have we really lost all sense of right and wrong? There are more than a dozen people now in prison for theft and fraud relating to this tragedy. Next time we have an emergency, it’s just going to make the government much more cautious in their approach, undoubtedly leading to headlines the other way. They can’t win.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
The only risk I see is if the FBI do a real deep dive on him and produce a file saying Kavanaugh got blind drunk repeatedly as a student contradicting his testimony.
If they just investigate the attempted rape then he'll not have any problems as it is a she said he said situation that no jury in the land would convict on.
That won't be the scope of the investigation as described by Flake. Limited in scope to the specific allegations made to date. His drinking habits fall outside of that scope as it is to look at whether he assaulted women in the way described.
Tonight I logged in to PB expecting to see some discussion of the plausibilty and rationality of the Boris plan. It's two years too late, but if it had been put forwards with some gusto back then I can't see that it wouldn't have been the sort of thing that might have worked. Anyone radically disagree?
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
Tonight I logged in to PB expecting to see some discussion of the plausibilty and rationality of the Boris plan. It's two years too late, but if it had been put forwards with some gusto back then I can't see that it wouldn't have been the sort of thing that might have worked. Anyone radically disagree?
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
Agreed. What he’s saying does have merit, but it’s the most naked pitch for the PM’s job on the eve of conference, when the party should be getting behind Mrs May rather than seeking to undermine her and the EU negotiations. I doubt Boris now has more than a handful of MPs behind him, same as two years ago.
Executive Remuneration - the good, the bad and the ugly
Chales you're nearly there! Just "For a Few Dollars More". I think that Charles and I have nailed it for you here RCS. I take it we'll get 33% each of the worldwide syndication revenues, and perhaps 20% each of the cuddly toy sales?
as per Boles in his article. Gets rid of May's ni problem, exit bill, and hard deadline to negotiate trade deal. Less legally questionable than the transition period.
Yes, just reading it now. Boles recommends we leave via the EEA/EFTA and longer term try and negotiate a Canada style FTA ie a policy with some appeal to both Norway and Canada option backers and also acceptable to the EU unlike Chequers
Sorry, you haven't understood it. It isn't 'acceptable' to the EU - they don't get a say, because we just do it. So, their nonsense on the NI border becomes irrelevant.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
Judge's letter isn't subject to legal force. The "under penalty of felony" bit is meaningless. Does make it look more impressive though.
Tonight I logged in to PB expecting to see some discussion of the plausibilty and rationality of the Boris plan. It's two years too late, but if it had been put forwards with some gusto back then I can't see that it wouldn't have been the sort of thing that might have worked. Anyone radically disagree?
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
It wouldn't have made any difference. Johnson wants Lancaster House. That's deader than Chequers. At least Chequers acknowledges the issues even if doesn't come up with workable answers.
On the other topic it looks like Sen Flake wants Kavanaugh to withdraw.
Tonight I logged in to PB expecting to see some discussion of the plausibilty and rationality of the Boris plan. It's two years too late, but if it had been put forwards with some gusto back then I can't see that it wouldn't have been the sort of thing that might have worked. Anyone radically disagree?
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
It wouldn't have made any difference. Johnson wants Lancaster House. That's deader than Chequers. At least Chequers acknowledges the issues even if doesn't come up with workable answers.
On the other topic it looks like Sen Flake wants Kavanaugh to withdraw.
Flake may just have brought a bit of decency into the hearing but 7 days for the FBI is absurd
Another factor in the US mid-terms is the price of "gas".With Brent crude hitting new four-year highs above $83 this week, US fuel prices are at levels that could make them an issue in November’s midterm elections, and it is helpful to Republicans for Mr Trump to deflect blame away from his administration. One of the principal reasons for the rise in crude prices is the president’s decision to reinstate sanctions on Iran, which are proving notably effective in taking barrels off the market.
Tonight I logged in to PB expecting to see some discussion of the plausibilty and rationality of the Boris plan. It's two years too late, but if it had been put forwards with some gusto back then I can't see that it wouldn't have been the sort of thing that might have worked. Anyone radically disagree?
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
It wouldn't have made any difference. Johnson wants Lancaster House. That's deader than Chequers. At least Chequers acknowledges the issues even if doesn't come up with workable answers.
On the other topic it looks like Sen Flake wants Kavanaugh to withdraw.
Flake may just have brought a bit of decency into the hearing but 7 days for the FBI is absurd
The FBI did the Anita Hill investigation in 3 days. They can throw the resources necessary to get this done.
It is very difficult to investigate events when you don't have a date, time or location for the Ford incident. But she did give names - all of whom have rejected her version of events - and they can be interviewed formally.
As for the other allegations, Ramirez is very unclear as to the details of her assault - even not being sure it was Kavanaugh. The Swetnik story sounds very hard to believe. I cannot understand how someone would continue to attend a series of 10 parties where she knew gang rape was going on.
A US Senate committee has voted to approve Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the US Supreme Court as discussions continue over a possible FBI inquiry into allegations of sexual misconduct.
The vote came as a key Republican senator said he wanted a week's delay in confirmation hearings for Judge Kavanaugh to allow this to happen.
However, Jeff Flake supported the vote to pass the nomination from the Judiciary Committee to the full Senate.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
Saying he has no recollection of an event in a signed statement is somewhat different to being questioned by the FBI (or the Senate judiciary committee). And, as an increasing number of people know, lying to the FBI can result in prison time.
Tonight I logged in to PB expecting to see some discussion of the plausibilty and rationality of the Boris plan. It's two years too late, but if it had been put forwards with some gusto back then I can't see that it wouldn't have been the sort of thing that might have worked. Anyone radically disagree?
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
It wouldn't have made any difference. Johnson wants Lancaster House. That's deader than Chequers. At least Chequers acknowledges the issues even if doesn't come up with workable answers.
On the other topic it looks like Sen Flake wants Kavanaugh to withdraw.
Flake may just have brought a bit of decency into the hearing but 7 days for the FBI is absurd
The FBI did the Anita Hill investigation in 3 days. They can throw the resources necessary to get this done.
It is very difficult to investigate events when you don't have a date, time or location for the Ford incident. But she did give names - all of whom have rejected her version of events - and they can be interviewed formally.
As for the other allegations, Ramirez is very unclear as to the details of her assault - even not being sure it was Kavanaugh. The Swetnik story sounds very hard to believe. I cannot understand how someone would continue to attend a series of 10 parties where she knew gang rape was going on.
This is an unholy mess.
Kavanaugh came over all simpering and sorry for himself. Just dreadful look for his cause and even if innocent, he is not fit for the role
The whole hearing puts the US deep in the sewer and must drive decent Americans and others to utter despair
All hail EFTA+CU, disguised with a name like “Chevening”, with a possible referendum thrown in (post April) to sweeten it through Parliament.
Customs Union is dead though.
Needed to prevent an Irish border? (Won’t be called the Customs Union, tho).
We currently have a customs union with Ireland but still have a currency, VAT, income tax and coroporation tax border between NI and Ireland.
The only one of those that affects goods crossing the border is VAT and that doesn't get collected at the border as long as both countries are in the common EU VAT regime.
....
Interesting argument in this piece. Britain is going to be so weakened by Brexit that the EU has nothing to worry about in terms of competitive advantage. Both parties talk it up for their different agendas.
On topic, when people say things like “50 is the new 40”, that’s relevant here. If 70 year olds are behaving like 60 year olds, they can work like 60 year olds. And we can expect them to. As we have fewer and fewer manual jobs, that becomes more realistic. So the ageing population doesn’t mean necessarily that the support ratio has to go down. The enemy isn’t mortality but morbidity.
as per Boles in his article. Gets rid of May's ni problem, exit bill, and hard deadline to negotiate trade deal. Less legally questionable than the transition period.
Yes, just reading it now. Boles recommends we leave via the EEA/EFTA and longer term try and negotiate a Canada style FTA ie a policy with some appeal to both Norway and Canada option backers and also acceptable to the EU unlike Chequers
Sorry, you haven't understood it. It isn't 'acceptable' to the EU - they don't get a say, because we just do it. So, their nonsense on the NI border becomes irrelevant.
There are three principle hurdles to the plan.
1. We need to join EFTA. That requires ratification by all the existing signatories, and that is by no means guaranteed by March next year. In particular, if we appear to just be using it as a "stepping stone" to something else, they may not be particularly keen to help.
2. It relies on us being able to flip from one side of a treaty to another. The EEA treaty (here) has us as a signatory as part of the EC. Our rights and obligations therefore only relate to that side of the treaty. I am incredibly sceptical of the idea that we could unilaterally change from one side of the treaty to another/
3. It would still be unacceptable to a large part of the ERG. JRM describes Norway as a "vassal state". And the Labour Party would be unhelpful because it wants the current government to fall. The LibDems *might* help. But it's a big "might".
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
Judge's letter isn't subject to legal force. The "under penalty of felony" bit is meaningless. Does make it look more impressive though.
Worth bearing in mind that in the bizarre US system, even if the GOP loses the senate elections in November, the new Senators don’t take their seats till early Jan.
So the Republicans still have plenty of time to nominate someone else.
as per Boles in his article. Gets rid of May's ni problem, exit bill, and hard deadline to negotiate trade deal. Less legally questionable than the transition period.
Yes, just reading it now. Boles recommends we leave via the EEA/EFTA and longer term try and negotiate a Canada style FTA ie a policy with some appeal to both Norway and Canada option backers and also acceptable to the EU unlike Chequers
Sorry, you haven't understood it. It isn't 'acceptable' to the EU - they don't get a say, because we just do it. So, their nonsense on the NI border becomes irrelevant.
There are three principle hurdles to the plan.
1. We need to join EFTA. That requires ratification by all the existing signatories, and that is by no means guaranteed by March next year. In particular, if we appear to just be using it as a "stepping stone" to something else, they may not be particularly keen to help.
2. It relies on us being able to flip from one side of a treaty to another. The EEA treaty (here) has us as a signatory as part of the EC. Our rights and obligations therefore only relate to that side of the treaty. I am incredibly sceptical of the idea that we could unilaterally change from one side of the treaty to another/
3. It would still be unacceptable to a large part of the ERG. JRM describes Norway as a "vassal state". And the Labour Party would be unhelpful because it wants the current government to fall. The LibDems *might* help. But it's a big "might".
FWIW. I expect we will end up in an EEA type arrangement. I expect it will not actually be the EEA. Partly because it won't actually be the same ,- it will include a customs Union for example. Partly because it would strain the existing EEA arrangement that its participants think works well. This makes your points 1 and 2 moot. Point 3 still stands however. I
Tonight I logged in to PB expecting to see some discussion of the plausibilty and rationality of the Boris plan. It's two years too late, but if it had been put forwards with some gusto back then I can't see that it wouldn't have been the sort of thing that might have worked. Anyone radically disagree?
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
It wouldn't have made any difference. Johnson wants Lancaster House. That's deader than Chequers. At least Chequers acknowledges the issues even if doesn't come up with workable answers.
On the other topic it looks like Sen Flake wants Kavanaugh to withdraw.
Flake may just have brought a bit of decency into the hearing but 7 days for the FBI is absurd
The FBI did the Anita Hill investigation in 3 days. They can throw the resources necessary to get this done.
It is very difficult to investigate events when you don't have a date, time or location for the Ford incident. But she did give names - all of whom have rejected her version of events - and they can be interviewed formally.
As for the other allegations, Ramirez is very unclear as to the details of her assault - even not being sure it was Kavanaugh. The Swetnik story sounds very hard to believe. I cannot understand how someone would continue to attend a series of 10 parties where she knew gang rape was going on.
This is an unholy mess.
Kavanaugh came over all simpering and sorry for himself. Just dreadful look for his cause and even if innocent, he is not fit for the role
The whole hearing puts the US deep in the sewer and must drive decent Americans and others to utter despair
My wife came to the opposite conclusion - that he was justifiably angry at his treatment by the democrats who were just playing political games
as per Boles in his article. Gets rid of May's ni problem, exit bill, and hard deadline to negotiate trade deal. Less legally questionable than the transition period.
Yes, just reading it now. Boles recommends we leave via the EEA/EFTA and longer term try and negotiate a Canada style FTA ie a policy with some appeal to both Norway and Canada option backers and also acceptable to the EU unlike Chequers
Sorry, you haven't understood it. It isn't 'acceptable' to the EU - they don't get a say, because we just do it. So, their nonsense on the NI border becomes irrelevant.
There are three principle hurdles to the plan.
1. We need to join EFTA. That requires ratification by all the existing signatories, and that is by no means guaranteed by March next year. In particular, if we appear to just be using it as a "stepping stone" to something else, they may not be particularly keen to help.
2. It relies on us being able to flip from one side of a treaty to another. The EEA treaty (here) has us as a signatory as part of the EC. Our rights and obligations therefore only relate to that side of the treaty. I am incredibly sceptical of the idea that we could unilaterally change from one side of the treaty to another/
3. It would still be unacceptable to a large part of the ERG. JRM describes Norway as a "vassal state". And the Labour Party would be unhelpful because it wants the current government to fall. The LibDems *might* help. But it's a big "might".
1. Joining EFTA is helpful, but not essential. At worst, we would be in breach of the treaty, but that doesn't mean we can be thrown out. 2. The treaty has 32 'sides' (31 countries plus EU). Flipping from one 'side' to another has no meaning. 3. Agreed, but it requires no vote; its the default.
Still, agree with Boris. Likelihood is that EU agree something close the chequers and a deal is done.
as per Boles in his article. Gets rid of May's ni problem, exit bill, and hard deadline to negotiate trade deal. Less legally questionable than the transition period.
Yes, just reading it now. Boles recommends we leave via the EEA/EFTA and longer term try and negotiate a Canada style FTA ie a policy with some appeal to both Norway and Canada option backers and also acceptable to the EU unlike Chequers
Sorry, you haven't understood it. It isn't 'acceptable' to the EU - they don't get a say, because we just do it. So, their nonsense on the NI border becomes irrelevant.
There are three principle hurdles to the plan.
1. We need to join EFTA. That requires ratification by all the existing signatories, and that is by no means guaranteed by March next year. In particular, if we appear to just be using it as a "stepping stone" to something else, they may not be particularly keen to help.
2. It relies on us being able to flip from one side of a treaty to another. The EEA treaty (here) has us as a signatory as part of the EC. Our rights and obligations therefore only relate to that side of the treaty. I am incredibly sceptical of the idea that we could unilaterally change from one side of the treaty to another/
3. It would still be unacceptable to a large part of the ERG. JRM describes Norway as a "vassal state". And the Labour Party would be unhelpful because it wants the current government to fall. The LibDems *might* help. But it's a big "might".
1. Joining EFTA is helpful, but not essential. At worst, we would be in breach of the treaty, but that doesn't mean we can be thrown out. 2. The treaty has 32 'sides' (31 countries plus EU). Flipping from one 'side' to another has no meaning. 3. Agreed, but it requires no vote; its the default.
Still, agree with Boris. Likelihood is that EU agree something close the chequers and a deal is done.
Read the treaty. It's between the members of the community and the members of EFTA.
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his endorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his enndorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
When I see people say they support X as PM/Leader, while their actions oppose them in fundamental ways, I assume it is a white lie designed to give cover that they are 'loyal' when said PM/Leader falls because of some other reason, so they don't appear to be wielding the knife.
Though if Boris did not rule out a challenge (in the sense of a VONC being sparked I presume) perhaps that is not what is going on.
1. We need to join EFTA. That requires ratification by all the existing signatories, and that is by no means guaranteed by March next year. In particular, if we appear to just be using it as a "stepping stone" to something else, they may not be particularly keen to help.
2. It relies on us being able to flip from one side of a treaty to another. The EEA treaty (here) has us as a signatory as part of the EC. Our rights and obligations therefore only relate to that side of the treaty. I am incredibly sceptical of the idea that we could unilaterally change from one side of the treaty to another/
3. It would still be unacceptable to a large part of the ERG. JRM describes Norway as a "vassal state". And the Labour Party would be unhelpful because it wants the current government to fall. The LibDems *might* help. But it's a big "might".
1. Joining EFTA is helpful, but not essential. At worst, we would be in breach of the treaty, but that doesn't mean we can be thrown out. 2. The treaty has 32 'sides' (31 countries plus EU). Flipping from one 'side' to another has no meaning. 3. Agreed, but it requires no vote; its the default.
Still, agree with Boris. Likelihood is that EU agree something close the chequers and a deal is done.
Read the treaty. It's between the members of the community and the members of EFTA.
That isn't how a contract (and therefore treaty) works. We are parties to it. Turning it around, if a deal is agreed, I can see it biting us on the arse if no-one remembers to give the 12months' notice: we will be sued for non-compliance after the transition period ends.
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his enndorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
When I see people say they support X as PM/Leader, while their actions oppose them in fundamental ways, I assume it is a white lie designed to give cover that they are 'loyal' when said PM/Leader falls because of some other reason, so they don't appear to be wielding the knife.
Though if Boris did not rule out a challenge (in the sense of a VONC being sparked I presume) perhaps that is not what is going on.
Something is going on. Why would he say the EU are likely to accept TM Chequers deal which is being latched on by the media and is a gift to TM on the eve of conference
Gaff - unlikely with Boris Anger ERG - obviously as it has diluted their argument
On topic, when people say things like “50 is the new 40”, that’s relevant here. If 70 year olds are behaving like 60 year olds, they can work like 60 year olds. And we can expect them to. As we have fewer and fewer manual jobs, that becomes more realistic. So the ageing population doesn’t mean necessarily that the support ratio has to go down. The enemy isn’t mortality but morbidity.
My dad retired aged 60 in 2006. He never earned a very large salary, but his Japanese company had a decent final salary pension scheme and allow staff to retire at 60. He's done some part time work here and there since but he could not wait to leave his full time job. Whilst his job wasn't especially manual by the end, mentally he was probably worn out having not secured any promotions in the last 10 years of his career (I'm convinced he was a victim of age discrimination).
I'm coming up to 10 years in work and I have to say the idea of working beyond 60 makes me feel sick. I think the trick is to find a job that is local, fairly easy even if a bit repetitive and doesn't involve consistently providing more senior members of staff with information. Basically everything my job isn't!
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his enndorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
When I see people say they support X as PM/Leader, while their actions oppose them in fundamental ways, I assume it is a white lie designed to give cover that they are 'loyal' when said PM/Leader falls because of some other reason, so they don't appear to be wielding the knife.
Though if Boris did not rule out a challenge (in the sense of a VONC being sparked I presume) perhaps that is not what is going on.
Something is going on. Why would he say the EU are likely to accept TM Chequers deal which is being latched on by the media and is a gift to TM on the eve of conference
Gaff - unlikely with Boris Anger ERG - obviously as it has diluted their argument
Seems clear to me. Chequers is a lickspittle arrangement. OF COURSE, the EU LOVE it. Wouldn't it be better to have a prime minister that stands up to the naysayers. A buccaneering PM like ... let me think. Ah, yes, I know just the chap. Perfect for the job.
On topic, when people say things like “50 is the new 40”, that’s relevant here. If 70 year olds are behaving like 60 year olds, they can work like 60 year olds. And we can expect them to. As we have fewer and fewer manual jobs, that becomes more realistic. So the ageing population doesn’t mean necessarily that the support ratio has to go down. The enemy isn’t mortality but morbidity.
Anyway, plenty of 70 year olds can do manual jobs (should they want to).
That isn't how a contract (and therefore treaty) works. We are parties to it. Turning it around, if a deal is agreed, I can see it biting us on the arse if no-one remembers to give the 12months' notice: we will be sued for non-compliance after the transition period ends.
How about we ask a lawyer? I think there are a few on this site
Picking a random part of the treaty: "The EFTA States shall have the same rights and obligations as EC Member States within EC committees in which they participate fully, by virtue of Article 76 and Part VI of the Agreement and the corresponding Protocols, except in respect of voting procedures, if any."
Well, we won't be an EFTA state (which is narrowly defined at the beginning of the Treaty), and we won't be an EC member state. So, how does that work?
All hail EFTA+CU, disguised with a name like “Chevening”, with a possible referendum thrown in (post April) to sweeten it through Parliament.
EFTA and the EU's Customs Union are mutually exclusive.
That's not technically true. It is true to say that there are no EFTA members who are members of the Customs Union, but there is nothing in the EFTA treaty that would prevent a member from being a member of a custom union with the EU.
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his enndorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
When I see people say they support X as PM/Leader, while their actions oppose them in fundamental ways, I assume it is a white lie designed to give cover that they are 'loyal' when said PM/Leader falls because of some other reason, so they don't appear to be wielding the knife.
Though if Boris did not rule out a challenge (in the sense of a VONC being sparked I presume) perhaps that is not what is going on.
Something is going on. Why would he say the EU are likely to accept TM Chequers deal which is being latched on by the media and is a gift to TM on the eve of conference
Gaff - unlikely with Boris Anger ERG - obviously as it has diluted their argument
Seems clear to me. Chequers is a lickspittle arrangement. OF COURSE, the EU LOVE it. Wouldn't it be better to have a prime minister that stands up to the naysayers. A buccaneering PM like ... let me think. Ah, yes, I know just the chap. Perfect for the job.
That is not how it will be used by TM at conference. Her speech writers must be incorporating 'even Boris thinks Chequers will be accepted ' into her conference address.
And you miss my point - he has to change tack to attract more support if he ever wants to be put forward to the membership
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
Judge's letter isn't subject to legal force. The "under penalty of felony" bit is meaningless. Does make it look more impressive though.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
Judge's letter isn't subject to legal force. The "under penalty of felony" bit is meaningless. Does make it look more impressive though.
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his endorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
I interpreted his comment as “do nothing, get Chequers”. So “do something “
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
Judge's letter isn't subject to legal force. The "under penalty of felony" bit is meaningless. Does make it look more impressive though.
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his endorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
I interpreted his comment as “do nothing, get Chequers”. So “do something “
For him to suggest Chequers will be accepted is amazing when everyone else says otherwise
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
Murkowski is on the investigation train so Collins can keep schtum.
Seems like the Republicans are only too eager to let the FBI have at it.
Kavanaugh to be confirmed looks like the right bet at the moment.
Boris comments tonight when he said he expected the EU to do a deal on Chequers was extraordinary
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his endorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
I interpreted his comment as “do nothing, get Chequers”. So “do something “
For him to suggest Chequers will be accepted is amazing when everyone else says otherwise
No, he’s being clever. The more Chequers becomes a possibility the more the Brexiteers will need to act to stop it.
Also, since he resigned because of chequers on a point of principle, to be relevant he has a vested interest in it still being a threat.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
It didn't sound like he was going to flip to me, just needs the FBI investigation (Quite what they'll turn up in one week I have no idea). So Kavanaugh gets in I think
Well, I suspect they'll officially interview everyone. And then the question is what Mark Judge says. If he were to withdraw his support - and remember he declined to be testify under oath at the hearings - then it will be all over for Kavanagh.
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
Yes I think that's fair. To be honest Kavanaugh should welcome the FBI investigation, allows him to start his SCOTUS career with a clean bill of health
Kavanaugh has said clearly that he is happy to be investigated by whoever the committee chose.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
Judge's letter isn't subject to legal force. The "under penalty of felony" bit is meaningless. Does make it look more impressive though.
That isn't how a contract (and therefore treaty) works. We are parties to it. Turning it around, if a deal is agreed, I can see it biting us on the arse if no-one remembers to give the 12months' notice: we will be sued for non-compliance after the transition period ends.
How about we ask a lawyer? I think there are a few on this site
Picking a random part of the treaty: "The EFTA States shall have the same rights and obligations as EC Member States within EC committees in which they participate fully, by virtue of Article 76 and Part VI of the Agreement and the corresponding Protocols, except in respect of voting procedures, if any."
Well, we won't be an EFTA state (which is narrowly defined at the beginning of the Treaty), and we won't be an EC member state. So, how does that work?
Per the definition, the UK is an EU 'member state', even if it no longer is a member in reality
All hail EFTA+CU, disguised with a name like “Chevening”, with a possible referendum thrown in (post April) to sweeten it through Parliament.
EFTA and the EU's Customs Union are mutually exclusive.
That's not technically true. It is true to say that there are no EFTA members who are members of the Customs Union, but there is nothing in the EFTA treaty that would prevent a member from being a member of a custom union with the EU.
Its not the treaty itself, but the trade agreements
All hail EFTA+CU, disguised with a name like “Chevening”, with a possible referendum thrown in (post April) to sweeten it through Parliament.
EFTA and the EU's Customs Union are mutually exclusive.
That's not technically true. It is true to say that there are no EFTA members who are members of the Customs Union, but there is nothing in the EFTA treaty that would prevent a member from being a member of a custom union with the EU.
Its not the treaty itself, but the trade agreements
The trade agreements the EU has or the ones EFTA has?
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
Murkowski is on the investigation train so Collins can keep schtum.
Seems like the Republicans are only too eager to let the FBI have at it.
Kavanaugh to be confirmed looks like the right bet at the moment.
Agreed: it's 65-70% that he's confirmed right now.
If it looks like he's going to be confirmed, expect that a couple of Dems in Republican seats flip to make themselves look "above the fray".
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
Murkowski is on the investigation train so Collins can keep schtum.
Seems like the Republicans are only too eager to let the FBI have at it.
Kavanaugh to be confirmed looks like the right bet at the moment.
Agreed: it's 65-70% that he's confirmed right now.
If it looks like he's going to be confirmed, expect that a couple of Dems in Republican seats flip to make themselves look "above the fray".
Polling for Red State Dems says that the Dems voting Yes hurt their base without winning anything extra from Independents/Republicans.
The calculus says they are better off voting No regardless.
That isn't how a contract (and therefore treaty) works. We are parties to it. Turning it around, if a deal is agreed, I can see it biting us on the arse if no-one remembers to give the 12months' notice: we will be sued for non-compliance after the transition period ends.
How about we ask a lawyer? I think there are a few on this site
Picking a random part of the treaty: "The EFTA States shall have the same rights and obligations as EC Member States within EC committees in which they participate fully, by virtue of Article 76 and Part VI of the Agreement and the corresponding Protocols, except in respect of voting procedures, if any."
Well, we won't be an EFTA state (which is narrowly defined at the beginning of the Treaty), and we won't be an EC member state. So, how does that work?
Per the definition, the UK is an EU 'member state', even if it no longer is a member in reality
I'm sorry, but those kind of issues run through the whole text of the treaty. We wouldn't be entitled to dispute resolution, because that refers explicitly to the EFTA countries, for example.
I think it's simply a nonsense to suggest we could - by our own volition alone - remain a party to the EEA agreement, were we not an EU member.
What do the conference locations tell us about the political parties and what do the parties want them to tell us?
That these are places with decent sized conference facilities?
Lib Dem’s and Labour withcore vote strategies. Tories targeting the Midlands?
There are now only about 6 places that have the conference facilities and the hotel capacity. The parties have to rotate from region to region so we get a fairly predictable list of venues.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
Murkowski is on the investigation train so Collins can keep schtum.
Seems like the Republicans are only too eager to let the FBI have at it.
Kavanaugh to be confirmed looks like the right bet at the moment.
If I was cynical I’d say that fighting the FBI issue in committee meant that the Democrats used every one of their 5 minute sessions asking for an FBI investigation
Assuming there is nothing to find, conceding a fast investigation now leads the Democrats without a leg to stand on
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
Murkowski is on the investigation train so Collins can keep schtum.
Seems like the Republicans are only too eager to let the FBI have at it.
Kavanaugh to be confirmed looks like the right bet at the moment.
If I was cynical I’d say that fighting the FBI issue in committee meant that the Democrats used every one of their 5 minute sessions asking for an FBI investigation
Assuming there is nothing to find, conceding a fast investigation now leads the Democrats without a leg to stand on
He's guilty as hell. They should have hired the "Republican" prosecutor and let her finish her examination.
What do the conference locations tell us about the political parties and what do the parties want them to tell us?
That these are places with decent sized conference facilities?
Lib Dem’s and Labour withcore vote strategies. Tories targeting the Midlands?
There are now only about 6 places that have the conference facilities and the hotel capacity. The parties have to rotate from region to region so we get a fairly predictable list of venues.
At the moment I would suggest Brighton, Bournemouth, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow. Blackpool, Scarborough, Torquay, and Harrogate have had their day.
If Flake flips, Senator Collins will quietly inform the Republican leadership that they need to withdraw Kavanaugh because they really don't want her publicly voting him down.
Murkowski is on the investigation train so Collins can keep schtum.
Seems like the Republicans are only too eager to let the FBI have at it.
Kavanaugh to be confirmed looks like the right bet at the moment.
If I was cynical I’d say that fighting the FBI issue in committee meant that the Democrats used every one of their 5 minute sessions asking for an FBI investigation
Assuming there is nothing to find, conceding a fast investigation now leads the Democrats without a leg to stand on
He's guilty as hell. They should have hired the "Republican" prosecutor and let her finish her examination.
What do the conference locations tell us about the political parties and what do the parties want them to tell us?
That these are places with decent sized conference facilities?
Lib Dem’s and Labour withcore vote strategies. Tories targeting the Midlands?
There are now only about 6 places that have the conference facilities and the hotel capacity. The parties have to rotate from region to region so we get a fairly predictable list of venues.
At the moment I would suggest Brighton, Bournemouth, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow. Blackpool, Scarborough, Torquay, and Harrogate have had their day.
Given the hotel building spree the country has been on in recent years I would have thought that the number of possible locations has significantly increased.
All hail EFTA+CU, disguised with a name like “Chevening”, with a possible referendum thrown in (post April) to sweeten it through Parliament.
EFTA and the EU's Customs Union are mutually exclusive.
That's not technically true. It is true to say that there are no EFTA members who are members of the Customs Union, but there is nothing in the EFTA treaty that would prevent a member from being a member of a custom union with the EU.
Yes there is. The EFTA treaty says you have to apply to join EFTA’s trade agreements. Can’t do that if you’re independently part of a customs union.
Comments
"Options: The Worst Reward?"
I'd reckon he's 65-70% likely to make it to SCOTUS. But no more.
"Surely there's a better Option?", "Share Options: Why we should be exercised"
To be honest if you write a poor article no-one will care, and if you write a great one then the title won't hold it back.
Perhaps "Orange Elephants spotted on the Moon" will do the trick?
What you should be most concerned about is that we know what you're going to say. I've no doubt there are some insights beyond the obvious - I think if any of them are title worthy then that'd be the way forwards.
For what it's worth I nearly like your videos, but not just there yet.
Edit:Actually on reflection your worst reward works ok, perhaps 'poor reward' is better. All the above applies though
If they just investigate the attempted rape then he'll not have any problems as it is a she said he said situation that no jury in the land would convict on.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6218003/Council-worker-stole-Grenfell-fund-jailed-five-half-years.html
Have we really lost all sense of right and wrong? There are more than a dozen people now in prison for theft and fraud relating to this tragedy. Next time we have an emergency, it’s just going to make the government much more cautious in their approach, undoubtedly leading to headlines the other way. They can’t win.
Judge also submitted his statement that he has no recollection of events as described by Ford in a signed statement that is subject to legal force - so he hasn't declined all legal involvement in his contribution
So the conclusion is to ask Boris what the hell he's doing waiting so late to come up with the foggiest of concepts now he's employed privately, and yet he totally failed to come up with anything at all when we were paying his bills.
We're rich Mr Charles!
On the other topic it looks like Sen Flake wants Kavanaugh to withdraw.
He’s lost his wife, his leadership prospects, and his potency. His plan is irrelevant and no one is listening anymore.
I suspect he’ll retire at the next election rather than face a likely loss.
All hail EFTA+CU, disguised with a name like “Chevening”, with a possible referendum thrown in (post April) to sweeten it through Parliament.
Labour - Liverpool
Conservative - Birmingham
What do the conference locations tell us about the political parties and what do the parties want them to tell us?
(Won’t be called the Customs Union, tho).
Long-suffering UK savers could soon see higher returns, as one of Wall Street's swankiest banks boosts its presence on this side of the Atlantic.
I think there's an s too many in that sentence.
It is very difficult to investigate events when you don't have a date, time or location for the Ford incident. But she did give names - all of whom have rejected her version of events - and they can be interviewed formally.
As for the other allegations, Ramirez is very unclear as to the details of her assault - even not being sure it was Kavanaugh. The Swetnik story sounds very hard to believe. I cannot understand how someone would continue to attend a series of 10 parties where she knew gang rape was going on.
This is an unholy mess.
1.5% pa from Goldman Sachs.
Why bother.
A US Senate committee has voted to approve Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the US Supreme Court as discussions continue over a possible FBI inquiry into allegations of sexual misconduct.
The vote came as a key Republican senator said he wanted a week's delay in confirmation hearings for Judge Kavanaugh to allow this to happen.
However, Jeff Flake supported the vote to pass the nomination from the Judiciary Committee to the full Senate.
The final vote was 11-10 in favour.
Not on message for ERG
The whole hearing puts the US deep in the sewer and must drive decent Americans and others to utter despair
....
Interesting argument in this piece. Britain is going to be so weakened by Brexit that the EU has nothing to worry about in terms of competitive advantage. Both parties talk it up for their different agendas.
https://twitter.com/JohnSpringford/status/1045628796056014850
Apparently holding an event with John Major to stop Brexit
When will they ever get over themselves
1. We need to join EFTA. That requires ratification by all the existing signatories, and that is by no means guaranteed by March next year. In particular, if we appear to just be using it as a "stepping stone" to something else, they may not be particularly keen to help.
2. It relies on us being able to flip from one side of a treaty to another. The EEA treaty (here) has us as a signatory as part of the EC. Our rights and obligations therefore only relate to that side of the treaty. I am incredibly sceptical of the idea that we could unilaterally change from one side of the treaty to another/
3. It would still be unacceptable to a large part of the ERG. JRM describes Norway as a "vassal state". And the Labour Party would be unhelpful because it wants the current government to fall. The LibDems *might* help. But it's a big "might".
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/ted-cruz-mark-judge-would-take-fifth.html
So the Republicans still have plenty of time to nominate someone else.
FWIW. I expect we will end up in an EEA type arrangement. I expect it will not actually be the EEA. Partly because it won't actually be the same ,- it will include a customs Union for example. Partly because it would strain the existing EEA arrangement that its participants think works well. This makes your points 1 and 2 moot. Point 3 still stands however. I
2. The treaty has 32 'sides' (31 countries plus EU). Flipping from one 'side' to another has no meaning.
3. Agreed, but it requires no vote; its the default.
Still, agree with Boris. Likelihood is that EU agree something close the chequers and a deal is done.
He must have upset ERG by giving credence to Chequers and also his endorsement of TM as PM
Maybe he realises he is dead in the water if he continues aggressively against TM and the cabinet and he is following a strategy to soften his ERG approach and to try to gain more support among the mps for his future bid.
Just my ramblings but he has to reach out to the mps to have any chance of getting into the final two to go to the members
Though if Boris did not rule out a challenge (in the sense of a VONC being sparked I presume) perhaps that is not what is going on.
There are three principle hurdles to the plan.
1. We need to join EFTA. That requires ratification by all the existing signatories, and that is by no means guaranteed by March next year. In particular, if we appear to just be using it as a "stepping stone" to something else, they may not be particularly keen to help.
2. It relies on us being able to flip from one side of a treaty to another. The EEA treaty (here) has us as a signatory as part of the EC. Our rights and obligations therefore only relate to that side of the treaty. I am incredibly sceptical of the idea that we could unilaterally change from one side of the treaty to another/
3. It would still be unacceptable to a large part of the ERG. JRM describes Norway as a "vassal state". And the Labour Party would be unhelpful because it wants the current government to fall. The LibDems *might* help. But it's a big "might".
1. Joining EFTA is helpful, but not essential. At worst, we would be in breach of the treaty, but that doesn't mean we can be thrown out.
2. The treaty has 32 'sides' (31 countries plus EU). Flipping from one 'side' to another has no meaning.
3. Agreed, but it requires no vote; its the default.
Still, agree with Boris. Likelihood is that EU agree something close the chequers and a deal is done.
Read the treaty. It's between the members of the community and the members of EFTA.
That isn't how a contract (and therefore treaty) works. We are parties to it. Turning it around, if a deal is agreed, I can see it biting us on the arse if no-one remembers to give the 12months' notice: we will be sued for non-compliance after the transition period ends.
Gaff - unlikely with Boris
Anger ERG - obviously as it has diluted their argument
I'm coming up to 10 years in work and I have to say the idea of working beyond 60 makes me feel sick. I think the trick is to find a job that is local, fairly easy even if a bit repetitive and doesn't involve consistently providing more senior members of staff with information. Basically everything my job isn't!
Picking a random part of the treaty: "The EFTA States shall have the same rights and obligations as EC Member States within EC committees in which they participate fully, by virtue of Article 76 and Part VI of the Agreement and the corresponding Protocols, except in respect of voting procedures, if any."
Well, we won't be an EFTA state (which is narrowly defined at the beginning of the Treaty), and we won't be an EC member state. So, how does that work?
And you miss my point - he has to change tack to attract more support if he ever wants to be put forward to the membership
Seems like the Republicans are only too eager to let the FBI have at it.
Kavanaugh to be confirmed looks like the right bet at the moment.
Also, since he resigned because of chequers on a point of principle, to be relevant he has a vested interest in it still being a threat.
If it looks like he's going to be confirmed, expect that a couple of Dems in Republican seats flip to make themselves look "above the fray".
The calculus says they are better off voting No regardless.
I think it's simply a nonsense to suggest we could - by our own volition alone - remain a party to the EEA agreement, were we not an EU member.
Assuming there is nothing to find, conceding a fast investigation now leads the Democrats without a leg to stand on