Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
‘the great Tories’... your sense of humour is still operative, I see.
To be fair to Hunt, I think his point was clearly that the EU isn’t the USSR, but it was an ill thought out piece of rhetoric - particularly if he really wants to be PM, rather than just win the leadership.
You need a lot of humour these days when you're in the TRG wing of the Tory party.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
You believe comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is fair comment? I can understand that some people would prefer us to be out if the EU but the attitude of some leavers to the EU is quite unhinged and irrational.
I care not whether it is offensive but it is plain wrong unless you are expecting EU tanks to start rolling up the Mall any time now. Give your head a wobble and try and bring a bit of common sense into your anti- EU nonsense.
He contrasted the EU to the Soviet Union. Suggesting the EU was set up to be the opposite of the Soviet Union and should act accordingly. Is that wrong?
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream? The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
I don’t think it was fair at all. One cannot possibly compare the human misery caused by the USSR to that of the EU, even in Greece.
A much better comparison would have been to Austria-Hungary, which used to be called the ‘dungeon of nations’ by its enemies.
“The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.”
“If you turn the EU club into a prison, the desire to get out won’t diminish, it will grow, and we won’t be the only prisoner that will want to escape.”
I think that’s fair comment.
Totally agree.
Jeremy Hunt's measured comments were that of a Prime Minister in waiting.
They always do this to the great Tories, cf Thatcher's 'No such thing as society' observation.
‘the great Tories’... your sense of humour is still operative, I see.
To be fair to Hunt, I think his point was clearly that the EU isn’t the USSR, but it was an ill thought out piece of rhetoric - particularly if he really wants to be PM, rather than just win the leadership.
It is in the reporting. I listened to it live and it seemed perfectly rationale. Maybe knowing it would be distorted he could have chosen his words better
However, it is all part of this absurd dance between the EU and UK and who knows the outcome.
The conference speeches of Ruth Davidson and the new Welsh leader, Paul Davies, were top class
I haven't seen Paul Davies before but he delivered a powerful put down of Welsh labour with its failing NHS and schools. Despite getting more per head in funding than England the Welsh NHS funding has been cut and education is by far the worst in the UK
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
Which is fine. If you want No Deal, we and they can insult each other till the cows come home. But since we are told a deal is vital to preserve our precious Union...
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
You believe comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is fair comment? I can understand that some people would prefer us to be out if the EU but the attitude of some leavers to the EU is quite unhinged and irrational.
I care not whether it is offensive but it is plain wrong unless you are expecting EU tanks to start rolling up the Mall any time now. Give your head a wobble and try and bring a bit of common sense into your anti- EU nonsense.
He contrasted the EU to the Soviet Union. Suggesting the EU was set up to be the opposite of the Soviet Union and should act accordingly. Is that wrong?
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream? The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.
We are leaving the EU under Article 50. To say that the EU is trapping us by not conceding the benefits of membership without its duties, and that this is somehow comparable to the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States, is utterly crass.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
I say we take off and nuke all 27 nations from orbit - only way to be sure. But that being off the cards, it's hard to see what actual payback we are capable of delivering.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
You believe comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is fair comment? I can understand that some people would prefer us to be out if the EU but the attitude of some leavers to the EU is quite unhinged and irrational.
I care not whether it is offensive but it is plain wrong unless you are expecting EU tanks to start rolling up the Mall any time now. Give your head a wobble and try and bring a bit of common sense into your anti- EU nonsense.
He contrasted the EU to the Soviet Union. Suggesting the EU was set up to be the opposite of the Soviet Union and should act accordingly. Is that wrong?
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream? The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.
We can leave. No one is stopping us. We just can't leave and have all our own way and a bag to put it in.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
It's all a bit Kenny Everett meets Ken Livingstone.
What will it be next? "They say we need a five year transition plan. I'll tell you who else had a five year plan..."
That does make the current polling numbers remarkable. In December 2009 the government was 17% behind in the Mori opinion poll.
Hard not to conclude that there is a huge drag on the Labour poll score from some mysterious hard to identify source.
Indeed. Although the levels of unemployment, interest rates and inflation make it equally clear there is a huge drag on the government to achieve such levels of dissatisfaction.
That does make the current polling numbers remarkable. In December 2009 the government was 17% behind in the Mori opinion poll.
Hard not to conclude that there is a huge drag on the Labour poll score from some mysterious hard to identify source.
You mean the chap who people said was a huge drag on Labour before the GE2017 but in reality saw one of the largest increases in Labour's share of the vote?
‘the great Tories’... your sense of humour is still operative, I see.
To be fair to Hunt, I think his point was clearly that the EU isn’t the USSR, but it was an ill thought out piece of rhetoric - particularly if he really wants to be PM, rather than just win the leadership.
You need a lot of humour these days when you're in the TRG wing of the Tory party.
Is the TRG still a thing ? I last encountered it over three decades ago.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
You believe comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is fair comment? I can understand that some people would prefer us to be out if the EU but the attitude of some leavers to the EU is quite unhinged and irrational.
I care not whether it is offensive but it is plain wrong unless you are expecting EU tanks to start rolling up the Mall any time now. Give your head a wobble and try and bring a bit of common sense into your anti- EU nonsense.
He contrasted the EU to the Soviet Union. Suggesting the EU was set up to be the opposite of the Soviet Union and should act accordingly. Is that wrong?
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream? The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.
Nobody is stopping us leaving. We could have walked away 2 years ago.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Perhaps we should tell then to shut up and go away ?
Labour’s digital media team is far, far superior to those of the other parties. Plenty of savvy millennials who want to work for them, plenty of money to pay them.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Perhaps we should tell then to shut up and go away ?
Perhaps we should. Walk away from negotiations and prepare for no deal until they want to deal with us with more respect and drop this moronic notion of an Irish Sea Border.
Labour’s digital media team is far, far superior to those of the other parties. Plenty of savvy millennials who want to work for them, plenty of money to pay them.
Maybe they could consider bidding to build an app for other political parties.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
You believe comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is fair comment? I can understand that some people would prefer us to be out if the EU but the attitude of some leavers to the EU is quite unhinged and irrational.
I care not whether it is offensive but it is plain wrong unless you are expecting EU tanks to start rolling up the Mall any time now. Give your head a wobble and try and bring a bit of common sense into your anti- EU nonsense.
He contrasted the EU to the Soviet Union. Suggesting the EU was set up to be the opposite of the Soviet Union and should act accordingly. Is that wrong?
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream? The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.
We are leaving the EU under Article 50. To say that the EU is trapping us by not conceding the benefits of membership without its duties, and that this is somehow comparable to the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States, is utterly crass.
The Irish Taoiseach has literally suggested that our planes wouldn't be able to fly and we wouldn't be able to have any medicines if we don't put a border down the middle of our country in the Irish Sea.
Planes flying is a global norm not an EU benefit of membership.
‘the great Tories’... your sense of humour is still operative, I see.
To be fair to Hunt, I think his point was clearly that the EU isn’t the USSR, but it was an ill thought out piece of rhetoric - particularly if he really wants to be PM, rather than just win the leadership.
You need a lot of humour these days when you're in the TRG wing of the Tory party.
Is the TRG still a thing ? I last encountered it over three decades ago.
They clearly work pretty slowly.
Am a member of the TRG.
Is £35 a year for the normal membership, and £450 for the Reformer class.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Sid and Doris
I don't recall you criticising @eucopresident for making fun of someone with diabetes with cakes on Instagram?
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
You believe comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is fair comment? I can understand that some people would prefer us to be out if the EU but the attitude of some leavers to the EU is quite unhinged and irrational.
I care not whether it is offensive but it is plain wrong unless you are expecting EU tanks to start rolling up the Mall any time now. Give your head a wobble and try and bring a bit of common sense into your anti- EU nonsense.
He contrasted the EU to the Soviet Union. Suggesting the EU was set up to be the opposite of the Soviet Union and should act accordingly. Is that wrong?
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream? The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.
We are leaving the EU under Article 50. To say that the EU is trapping us by not conceding the benefits of membership without its duties, and that this is somehow comparable to the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States, is utterly crass.
The Irish Taoiseach has literally suggested that our planes wouldn't be able to fly and we wouldn't be able to have any medicines if we don't put a border down the middle of our country in the Irish Sea.
Planes flying is a global norm not an EU benefit of membership.
That would be a consequence of there not being any deal at all, not of leaving the EU per se.
Nobody is demanding border in the Irish sea. That would only come into being if the overall UK relationship wasn't able to deliver a frictionless border within the island of Ireland.
That does make the current polling numbers remarkable. In December 2009 the government was 17% behind in the Mori opinion poll.
Hard not to conclude that there is a huge drag on the Labour poll score from some mysterious hard to identify source.
You mean the chap who people said was a huge drag on Labour before the GE2017 but in reality saw one of the largest increases in Labour's share of the vote?
Yebbut in terms of seats he won only four more than Gordon did in 2010!
‘the great Tories’... your sense of humour is still operative, I see.
To be fair to Hunt, I think his point was clearly that the EU isn’t the USSR, but it was an ill thought out piece of rhetoric - particularly if he really wants to be PM, rather than just win the leadership.
You need a lot of humour these days when you're in the TRG wing of the Tory party.
Is the TRG still a thing ? I last encountered it over three decades ago.
They clearly work pretty slowly.
Am a member of the TRG.
Is £35 a year for the normal membership, and £450 for the Reformer class.
That does make the current polling numbers remarkable. In December 2009 the government was 17% behind in the Mori opinion poll.
Hard not to conclude that there is a huge drag on the Labour poll score from some mysterious hard to identify source.
You mean the chap who people said was a huge drag on Labour before the GE2017 but in reality saw one of the largest increases in Labour's share of the vote?
That, or perhaps the people on his own side who continually criticise him when there isn't an election campaign.
I reckon we need another general election to resolve the uncertainty.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
I've got to say until you mentioned it I didn't even recognise the cake business was an insult.
It is in the reporting. I listened to it live and it seemed perfectly rationale. Maybe knowing it would be distorted he could have chosen his words better
No, it's the old adage - "it's not what you say, it's the way that you say it". Hunt's choice of words was poor but the poor judgement was in the tone.
He wasn't making a serious comparison - he was playing to his political gallery, to the only electorate that matters to him and to his career, the Conservative Party.
As I said yesterday, a real politician or leader won't be afraid to tell his or her audience the truths they don't want to hear. The easy way, the populist way, the Boris way, the Jeremy Hunt way, is to tell your audience what they want to hear.
Who cares about consistency, hypocrisy, principle? As long as the audience give a 5-minute standing ovation and the press coverage is good, nothing else matters.
‘the great Tories’... your sense of humour is still operative, I see.
To be fair to Hunt, I think his point was clearly that the EU isn’t the USSR, but it was an ill thought out piece of rhetoric - particularly if he really wants to be PM, rather than just win the leadership.
You need a lot of humour these days when you're in the TRG wing of the Tory party.
Is the TRG still a thing ? I last encountered it over three decades ago.
They clearly work pretty slowly.
Am a member of the TRG.
Is £35 a year for the normal membership, and £450 for the Reformer class.
Hammond’s position on the NI border is sensible. What he is making clear is that we will not sign up to a deal based on the longstop, at least as the EU and Eire claim to understand it. So we either have a deal that removes the longstop provisions or we have no deal at all. The EU and Eire in particular need to think on that.
It seems to me that this is the only way out of the interim agreement. It raises the stakes but that is unavoidable. The fact that it is boring, sane Mr Hammond that is playing this card really should cause the EU to pause. It means that the whole government means it.
This plan would pass the HoC with Labour votes though?
Very unlikely. If May can't get a deal through her own party do we seriously suggest that she is going to go down on her knees and beg Corbyn (or Umunna for that matter) to save her.
Virtually no one in Labour wants May to get a deal. The leadership don't want her to beccuae they hope to use the threat of no deal to force a general election. The remainers don't want her to because they hope to use the threat of no deal to force a new referendum. And the few caught in the middle (Flint, Snell etc) would have to face down the hostility of their overwhelming pro-remain constituency parties and colleagues.
May will not get more than a small handful of Labour MPs to back her, whatever she does.
Hmm, I don't think it's as simple as that. If we assume that she comes back with a deal (admittedly a big 'if'), then there will massive relief from business, the pound will rise and the airwaves will be full of pundits saying that this avoids disaster. If Labour then ally themselves with the extremists in Tory ranks to throw the deal in the bin, they run a massive risk of getting the blame for the disaster, since the alternatives probably don't actually work.
There is no way all of Labour are going to vote with JRM in favour of no deal.
But the vote will be for or against Mays deal ( if there is one). Labour will vote against. They will then say that May should go and let Labour negotiate a better deal, if necessary by extending A50 as Thronberry said last week.
If we end up with No Deal because of Corbyn - I think that will be the end of him. It's the exact opposite of what the Labour membership and the parliamentary party want.
their handling of it has been catastrophic - by far the biggest political disaster in the modern era.
Yeah - frothing in latte shops over Brexit is much worse than faking a crisis to start the Iraq war and the awful response to the crash of 2008.
World-leading (literally) response to 2008.
Only if your world is the Brown and Darling households.
Injecting $37Bn of our money into banks and shareholders still got a return ?
Hammond’s position on the NI border is sensible. What he is making clear is that we will not sign up to a deal based on the longstop, at least as the EU and Eire claim to understand it. So we either have a deal that removes the longstop provisions or we have no deal at all. The EU and Eire in particular need to think on that.
It seems to me that this is the only way out of the interim agreement. It raises the stakes but that is unavoidable. The fact that it is boring, sane Mr Hammond that is playing this card really should cause the EU to pause. It means that the whole government means it.
He delivered it very well. And I think he carried it off. But written down it is obviously nonsense. Why do we demean our politics with this knockabout yaboo routine every year?
Hammond’s position on the NI border is sensible. What he is making clear is that we will not sign up to a deal based on the longstop, at least as the EU and Eire claim to understand it. So we either have a deal that removes the longstop provisions or we have no deal at all. The EU and Eire in particular need to think on that.
It seems to me that this is the only way out of the interim agreement. It raises the stakes but that is unavoidable. The fact that it is boring, sane Mr Hammond that is playing this card really should cause the EU to pause. It means that the whole government means it.
You got more than NRK shareholders got. Given the bank was bust you were lucky to get anything.
True, but the difference between a 100% loss and the 95% or so loss I actually incurred is hardly anything to get excited about. I'm not complaining either way, but the suggestion that shareholders somehow didn't take the loss is bonkers.
Nobody suggested they didn't take a loss - they were bailed out by Gordon Brown with taxpayer funds.
Eh? You seem completely confused. It wasn't the shareholders who were bailed out, it was the bank's customers, and anyone who had any financial relationship with the bank's customers, which is broadly speaking every business and every individual in the country.
Indeed Mr Nabavi, I was no fan of Brown, but without the action that he and Darling took my business would have almost certainly had all accounts frozen with hideous consequences. It was a very frightening time for any business owner
We had an unbelievable number of new customers (and existing customers giving us a great share of their business) at that point. A very frightening time.
I can't see how references along the lines of planes not being able to fly can be seen as anything other than threats of EU "punishment" for the UK leaving. There is nothing fundamental to the UK leaving the EU that should inhibit the flying of planes between the UK and the EU. The EU have the power to prevent UK planes flying to the EU, just as the UK have the reciprocal power, but in no way should it seriously be considered as an issue within the withdrawal or longer term trade treaty talks. There are certain things (like planes flying) which, whilst requiring some sort of negotiated arrangements to be put in place, should be completely irrelevant to the main points of dispute. Which is why it is very difficult to take the EU seriously on this issue, without seeing them as a fundamentally hostile power.
This is not the only area where the EU appear (from their public pronouncements) to be taking a totally nonsensical approach to the negotiations, dragging in issues which should be irrelevant or at best negotiated separately. It is similar to their approach of seemingly saying that UK standards (across a whole range of areas) will simply cease to be recognised from 29th March. Whilst i understand an approach that says that UK standards should not be acceptable to the EU in perpetuity, there is no real justification for taking such an approach from day 1. Such an approach is essentially saying that UK standards (or indeed any other country's standard) should be judged not on objective merit but purely from whether it is an EU country. Divergence if it happens at all, is not going to happen instantly, and anyway it would be easy to get the UK to agree to no divergence for a limited period.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
I say we take off and nuke all 27 nations from orbit - only way to be sure. But that being off the cards, it's hard to see what actual payback we are capable of delivering.
That one actually did make me laugh.
The UK is capable of implementing an economic model that totally undercuts the EU and makes the UK very successful. We are big and ugly enough to do it and the EU depends on our security apparatus and armed forces.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Sid and Doris
I don't recall you criticising @eucopresident for making fun of someone with diabetes with cakes on Instagram?
I haven’t heard a brexiteer explain how, once out the CU, we avoid losing thousands of decent paying jobs to trade deflection.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Sid and Doris
I don't recall you criticising @eucopresident for making fun of someone with diabetes with cakes on Instagram?
I haven’t heard a brexiteer explain how, once out the CU, we avoid losing thousands of decent paying jobs to trade deflection.
Because we import more than we export to the EU. So if trade deflection takes place more EU based businesses move their ops here than businesses based here move to the EU.
There is nothing fundamental to the UK leaving the EU that should inhibit the flying of planes between the UK and the EU.
Except there is.
We are joint signatories to the agreements that allow planes to fly.
And we are leaving...
Which part of that is too confusing for Brexiteers to grasp?
There needs to be an agreement. There is no reason such an agreement needs be contingent on an agreement as a whole. There are countries in the world that can fly planes to the EU without having any other relationship with the EU on wider matters. The EU can do an agreement with the UK restricted solely to the issue of flights, if it so wishes. And there is no reason not to do so. What's it got to do with the Irish border?
I can't see how references along the lines of planes not being able to fly can be seen as anything other than threats of EU "punishment" for the UK leaving. There is nothing fundamental to the UK leaving the EU that should inhibit the flying of planes between the UK and the EU. The EU have the power to prevent UK planes flying to the EU, just as the UK have the reciprocal power, but in no way should it seriously be considered as an issue within the withdrawal or longer term trade treaty talks. There are certain things (like planes flying) which, whilst requiring some sort of negotiated arrangements to be put in place, should be completely irrelevant to the main points of dispute. Which is why it is very difficult to take the EU seriously on this issue, without seeing them as a fundamentally hostile power.
This is not the only area where the EU appear (from their public pronouncements) to be taking a totally nonsensical approach to the negotiations, dragging in issues which should be irrelevant or at best negotiated separately. It is similar to their approach of seemingly saying that UK standards (across a whole range of areas) will simply cease to be recognised from 29th March. Whilst i understand an approach that says that UK standards should not be acceptable to the EU in perpetuity, there is no real justification for taking such an approach from day 1. Such an approach is essentially saying that UK standards (or indeed any other country's standard) should be judged not on objective merit but purely from whether it is an EU country. Divergence if it happens at all, is not going to happen instantly, and anyway it would be easy to get the UK to agree to no divergence for a limited period.
How planes fly internationally is baroque and full of red tape.
Access to the European Open Skies deal is a huge thing, not a trivial freebie.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
You believe comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is fair comment? I can understand that some people would prefer us to be out if the EU but the attitude of some leavers to the EU is quite unhinged and irrational.
I care not whether it is offensive but it is plain wrong unless you are expecting EU tanks to start rolling up the Mall any time now. Give your head a wobble and try and bring a bit of common sense into your anti- EU nonsense.
Although that said we'll have lots of flights treaties from pre-open skies time period so there will still be some latitude for planes to fly internationally.
Just vastly more limited than the current situation.
Yet again we find out from the EU that playing hardball is only allowed one-way.
But he wasn't "playing hardball" was he? He was making a gratuitously offensive comparison, designed to offend. Furthermore, viewed from the Balitic States, whose agreement we will need for any deal, it is a comparison which would imply that the British government is totally ignorant of history, and worse, doesn't give a monkeys how such statements are seen. So, not playing hardball, but ignoring the very basic tenets of any negotiation.
It wasn’t offensive at all. It was fair comment.
The EU isn’t negotiating in good faith and is seeking to make an example of the UK.
Yes it was. And even if it was "fair comment", did it advance, or set back the achievement of a deal? It certainly pissed off 3 countries. Since the job of the FS is to promote the interests of the U.K. overseas, it was, at the very least, Hunt being crap at his job. Regardless of how many points scored at Conference.
How do you think the treatment of the UK by the EU27 at Salzburg went down? Do you think that helped May achieve a deal?
They don’t like it up ‘em. Payback time.
‘Cos trading playground insults is going to make us great again ?
Insulting the nation of collaborators French makes me feel great, why not the nation?
Which I’m happy to applaud on PB, but perhaps not from the Foriegn Secretary.
Fight fire with fire. The EU thinks its appropriate to mock and insult us. So why not return fire? Are they such snowflakes that they think its OK to mock a diabetic PM with cake memes after Salzberg but making an apt contrast is unthinkable?
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
Perhaps we should tell then to shut up and go away ?
Perhaps we should. Walk away from negotiations and prepare for no deal until they want to deal with us with more respect and drop this moronic notion of an Irish Sea Border.
Ha Ha Ha, when you are holding nothing but a deuce , England will be begging the EU soon. Get ready for an absolute surrender or a No deal.
Although that said we'll have lots of flights treaties from pre-open skies time period so there will still be some latitude for planes to fly internationally.
Just vastly more limited than the current situation.
Serious question - looked at objectively, what do the EU gain from severely restricting the capability of UK citizens being able to fly to the EU (and if the UK so chooses to retaliate, the reverse?)
I don't recall you criticising @eucopresident for making fun of someone with diabetes with cakes on Instagram?
I haven’t heard a brexiteer explain how, once out the CU, we avoid losing thousands of decent paying jobs to trade deflection.
Because we import more than we export to the EU. So if trade deflection takes place more EU based businesses move their ops here than businesses based here move to the EU.
Trade deflection occurs when non-members ship goods to a low tariff FTA member (or set up a subsidiary in the low tariff country) and re-ship to a high tariff FTA member. Hence, without a unified external tariff, trade flows become one-sided and further action is taken to deal with that. For example, assuming Europe operated a simple FTA, rather than a customs union, and if Germany imposes a high 40% tariff on Japanese cars, while France imposes just a 10% tariff, Japan would export its cars to French car dealers, and then re-sell them to Germany on a free-trade basis. This trade deflection is avoided if Germany and France (and others) form a customs union. Inside the EU Britaingains from trade creation massively outweigh the losses from trade diversion, because this isn’t just for final goods and resources, this is beneficial for supply chains integral to what the deindustrialising British economy has become, tariff free movement within the customs union for important supply chain.
can Britain outside really compete with Europe on this basis?
There’s no turning the clock back to last time we were outside. The EU didn’t exist then. Nor internet. Container shipping on this scale. The games changed. Instead of turning clock back, with Brexit it we turn it forward, accelerating deindustrialisation and globalisation without time to mitigate.
What Boris has done top of this thread is total genius. He has a superb team around him who know exactly how Trump won, and they are hitting May straight between the eyes with that.
You can see it working everyday on PB, as her loyalists inch bit by bit away from her.
What Boris has done top of this thread is total genius. He has a superb team around him who know exactly how Trump won, and they are hitting May straight between the eyes with that.
You can see it working everyday on PB, as her loyalists inch bit by bit away from her.
Michael Heseltine backs a second EU referendum or a general election in the Evening Standard to give the voters the say on the final decision on Brexit
A Conservative who talks sense.... no wonder he is not part of this administration.
He must also be about 80 years old...
Edit to add: 85
Perhaps age has brought wisdom? Or the current bunch are exhibiting the folly of youth?
Given the USSR references of recent days, perhaps the Politburo were on to something having oldies in charge. Of course senility is not good and some women would have been a good idea....
What Boris has done top of this thread is total genius. He has a superb team around him who know exactly how Trump won, and they are hitting May straight between the eyes with that.
You can see it working everyday on PB, as her loyalists inch bit by bit away from her.
Boris is Trump to May's Hillary
You can see it working everyday on PB, as her loyalists inch bit by bit away from her. Just like Hilary’s firewall did.
‘the great Tories’... your sense of humour is still operative, I see.
To be fair to Hunt, I think his point was clearly that the EU isn’t the USSR, but it was an ill thought out piece of rhetoric - particularly if he really wants to be PM, rather than just win the leadership.
You need a lot of humour these days when you're in the TRG wing of the Tory party.
Is the TRG still a thing ? I last encountered it over three decades ago.
They clearly work pretty slowly.
My grandfather founded its forerunner (the Tory Reform Committee) in the 40s!
Comments
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream? The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving.
If they're going to insult us damn right we should insult them back. It takes two to tango.
However, it is all part of this absurd dance between the EU and UK and who knows the outcome.
The conference speeches of Ruth Davidson and the new Welsh leader, Paul Davies, were top class
I haven't seen Paul Davies before but he delivered a powerful put down of Welsh labour with its failing NHS and schools. Despite getting more per head in funding than England the Welsh NHS funding has been cut and education is by far the worst in the UK
https://twitter.com/J_amesp/status/1046828583484821504?s=20
Hard not to conclude that there is a huge drag on the Labour poll score from some mysterious hard to identify source.
What will it be next? "They say we need a five year transition plan. I'll tell you who else had a five year plan..."
I last encountered it over three decades ago.
They clearly work pretty slowly.
Planes flying is a global norm not an EU benefit of membership.
Is £35 a year for the normal membership, and £450 for the Reformer class.
https://www.trg.org.uk/join-us/renew/
The Patrons are the sort of people I'd like to see as PM/in the cabinet/government.
https://www.trg.org.uk/about-us/#patrons
Nobody is demanding border in the Irish sea. That would only come into being if the overall UK relationship wasn't able to deliver a frictionless border within the island of Ireland.
I reckon we need another general election to resolve the uncertainty.
The hardest of no-deal Brexits incoming as planned.
Brexit = a calamity!
Brexiteers = xenophobes/little Englanders/thick mofos
Hmmmmm.
He wasn't making a serious comparison - he was playing to his political gallery, to the only electorate that matters to him and to his career, the Conservative Party.
As I said yesterday, a real politician or leader won't be afraid to tell his or her audience the truths they don't want to hear. The easy way, the populist way, the Boris way, the Jeremy Hunt way, is to tell your audience what they want to hear.
Who cares about consistency, hypocrisy, principle? As long as the audience give a 5-minute standing ovation and the press coverage is good, nothing else matters.
It seems to me that this is the only way out of the interim agreement. It raises the stakes but that is unavoidable. The fact that it is boring, sane Mr Hammond that is playing this card really should cause the EU to pause. It means that the whole government means it.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/oct/01/iphone-xs-and-xs-max-chargegate-sees-some-devices-fail-to-charge
Wait...that’s what you meant, isn’t it?
https://twitter.com/MatthewOToole2/status/1046863451371524096
All of the ERG nutters who have been whining about WTO and NOT having a border have been busted.
https://news.sky.com/story/juncker-british-planes-may-be-stopped-from-landing-in-eu-if-brexit-talks-fail-11514505
Presumably the same would apply to EU planes not being able to land here though?
This is not the only area where the EU appear (from their public pronouncements) to be taking a totally nonsensical approach to the negotiations, dragging in issues which should be irrelevant or at best negotiated separately. It is similar to their approach of seemingly saying that UK standards (across a whole range of areas) will simply cease to be recognised from 29th March. Whilst i understand an approach that says that UK standards should not be acceptable to the EU in perpetuity, there is no real justification for taking such an approach from day 1. Such an approach is essentially saying that UK standards (or indeed any other country's standard) should be judged not on objective merit but purely from whether it is an EU country. Divergence if it happens at all, is not going to happen instantly, and anyway it would be easy to get the UK to agree to no divergence for a limited period.
I thought WTO had already said there need not be a hard border in such a "sensitive" situation?
The UK is capable of implementing an economic model that totally undercuts the EU and makes the UK very successful. We are big and ugly enough to do it and the EU depends on our security apparatus and armed forces.
If only our Government exhibited that level of competence, and bollocks.
We are joint signatories to the agreements that allow planes to fly.
And we are leaving...
Which part of that is too confusing for Brexiteers to grasp?
NEW THREAD
We are the ones who want to change it.
Access to the European Open Skies deal is a huge thing, not a trivial freebie.
Just vastly more limited than the current situation.
You can see it working everyday on PB, as her loyalists inch bit by bit away from her.
30 seconds in
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hPDOYPxSSv0