I see a lot of frothing about Brexit - that makes a change.
On a different note is there any reason why we should want Patisserie Valerie to be saved ?
Aside from the dodgy finances its ratings on Trip Advisor are almost comically bad.
Sure the people losing their jobs might not be happy but we have low unemployment and record job vacancies and there are no shortage of other cake shops and cafes in every town.
Isn't creative destruction whereby land and labour is freed up by bad businesses closing down and made available to good businesses supposed to be part of free market capitalism ?
So the biggest act of self harm by a nation continues ! And not a single poll in 18 months has shown a majority who still think Brexit is a good idea . And yet the spivs and liars continue to parade around as if the country voted 80/20 to leave.
Barring a few saner voices the cabinet is full of delusional PM wannabes. These are dark times for the UK.
Maybe things have to be dark and getting darker for something dramatic to happen in relation to Brexit.
I always thought it would be a terrible path for the UK to follow, it is still not too late for a U - turn.
Unfortunately I think that ships sailed . Barring an unlikely second EU ref the demise of the UK will be cemented. And amazingly a large majority of Leavers support the break up of the UK , the next time a Leaver accuses Remainers of not being patriotic they need to look in the mirror .
Indeed, I could never see how supporting Leave, leading to a smaller economy, less money to spend on the military and so on is being patriotic. My experience of Leave supporters is that many of them do not understand how Brexit will affect the economy, trade and investment. Furthermore the fact immigration is going to continue Brexit or not will not satisfy Leavers. People voted Leave for many different reasons and the prospectus they were sold were lies that people chose to believe. My view is Brexit should be cancelled and as a result austerity ended, with an effort to reinvigorate those lives that have been left behind economically in recent years.
I do not understand pro-eu people who say the economy will be smaller but we need immigration to fulfil all the jobs that will be created.
I see a lot of frothing about Brexit - that makes a change.
On a different note is there any reason why we should want Patisserie Valerie to be saved ?
Aside from the dodgy finances its ratings on Trip Advisor are almost comically bad.
Sure the people losing their jobs might not be happy but we have low unemployment and record job vacancies and there are no shortage of other cake shops and cafes in every town.
Isn't creative destruction whereby land and labour is freed up by bad businesses closing down and made available to good businesses supposed to be part of free market capitalism ?
So the biggest act of self harm by a nation continues ! And not a single poll in 18 months has shown a majority who still think Brexit is a good idea . And yet the spivs and liars continue to parade around as if the country voted 80/20 to leave.
Barring a few saner voices the cabinet is full of delusional PM wannabes. These are dark times for the UK.
Maybe things have to be dark and getting darker for something dramatic to happen in relation to Brexit.
I always thought it would be a terrible path for the UK to follow, it is still not too late for a U - turn.
You turn if you want to. Britain’s not for turning.
Remainers can look at the younger generation and say I did the right thing for you . It’s not for those with little to lose to play roulette with the futures of those who have to live longest with the consequences .
What a simplistic view of things - how dare older people vote at all, when they won't feel the consequences as keenly. Speaks a 31 year old.
I agree! Don't let old people uneducated people people who read the Sun people who watch Jeremy Kyle people who live in Harlepool (excuse the tautologies) vote in referendums.
I think it is a mistake to think that even a majority of the ERG favour No Deal Brexit. They might prefer Canada Plus, but they also mostly believe a disorganised No Deal Brexit would cause economic issues that they would would be blamed for.
You'd think JRM would warn them about putting all their eggs in one basket, after all the South Sea Bubble must have cost him a fortune.
I think it is a mistake to think that even a majority of the ERG favour No Deal Brexit. They might prefer Canada Plus, but they also mostly believe a disorganised No Deal Brexit would cause economic issues that they would would be blamed for.
Maybe, so they might accept a crap-ish deal, but they won't accept a backstop that cannot be ended by the UK. There were 80 ERG MPs who were not happy with Chequers (they were prepared to back amendments) but maybe you can argue that many would have fallen into line for that deal since if accepted it would have removed the need for a backstop. But Chequers is dead. The backstop means that Brexit will probably never happen. May is not going to give them any choice but to vote it down.
Are there any treaties in existence that cannot be canceled?
The scope of the Convention is limited. It applies only to treaties concluded between states, so it does not cover agreements between states and international organizations or between international organizations themselves
For treaties between states and international organisations, there is a separate treaty, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations or between International Organizations from 1986. However, this second convention - despite being over 30 years old - is not in force, as it has not yet been ratified by a sufficient number of states. Furthermore, and slightly ironically in the circumstances, the EEC is not a signatory to the 1986 treaty anyway. (The international bodies that are are IAEA, ICAO, Interpol, ILO, IMO, OPCW, CTBTO Preparatory Commission, the UN, UNIDO, UPU, WHO, and WIPO.)
Robert, the EU and its predecessors were never international in the sense fo the treaty, but rather multilateral or regional.
Although the Council of Europe is a signatory (which has not ratified the treaty...)
Keep talking about Canada style deal, in a few months we don’t even have a deal with Canada. We won’t have a deal with anybody on earth? So thank goodness that, as promised making deals is easy!
Will we still be in Basel III? God help us if we are not
So the biggest act of self harm by a nation continues ! And not a single poll in 18 months has shown a majority who still think Brexit is a good idea . And yet the spivs and liars continue to parade around as if the country voted 80/20 to leave.
Barring a few saner voices the cabinet is full of delusional PM wannabes. These are dark times for the UK.
Maybe things have to be dark and getting darker for something dramatic to happen in relation to Brexit.
I always thought it would be a terrible path for the UK to follow, it is still not too late for a U - turn.
You turn if you want to. Britain’s not for turning.
Remainers can look at the younger generation and say I did the right thing for you . It’s not for those with little to lose to play roulette with the futures of those who have to live longest with the consequences .
Leavers can look at the younger generation and say I did the right thing for you. It’s not right for any citizen of voting age to cede powers to an undemocratic bureaucracy, removing future self-determination from those who have to live longest with the consequences.
I see a lot of frothing about Brexit - that makes a change.
On a different note is there any reason why we should want Patisserie Valerie to be saved ?
Aside from the dodgy finances its ratings on Trip Advisor are almost comically bad.
Sure the people losing their jobs might not be happy but we have low unemployment and record job vacancies and there are no shortage of other cake shops and cafes in every town.
Isn't creative destruction whereby land and labour is freed up by bad businesses closing down and made available to good businesses supposed to be part of free market capitalism ?
Indeed. I hadn't heard of them this time last week. However, wealthy and influential people stand to lose some money. That means something must be done.
I see a lot of frothing about Brexit - that makes a change.
On a different note is there any reason why we should want Patisserie Valerie to be saved ?
Aside from the dodgy finances its ratings on Trip Advisor are almost comically bad.
Sure the people losing their jobs might not be happy but we have low unemployment and record job vacancies and there are no shortage of other cake shops and cafes in every town.
Isn't creative destruction whereby land and labour is freed up by bad businesses closing down and made available to good businesses supposed to be part of free market capitalism ?
I have a lot of happy memories in the PV opposite House of Fraser in Manchester.
I love the way George Osborne is blamed for everything inc UC.
He did take 3 billion out of UC and IDS resigned over it
I guess you have never had to deal with govt over uc. It was shambolic before and will be a shambles after ...irrespective of funding. It was delayrd because it was a shambles.. you cant blame GO for that.
UC is ideologically driven.
People like IDS are obsessed by benefits. They simply do not understand that some people cannot work, that making people move from a weekly to a monthly budget does not take into consideration people who cannot budget or strategically plan ahead. In the same vein changing housing benefits direct from landlord to renter is complicating things for individuals who find finances hard to manage, Many people who are being shunted from existing benefits to UC are defined as being vulnerable and unable to plan yet the government are insistent on implementing this failing scheme despite the evidence that shows it does not work.
Where to start... UC is about making it as easy as possible to go back to work. The difficulty people have moving from a weekly to a monthly budget was one of the larger barriers to work. The benefits system kept people in a weekly system of payments while the world of work was mostly moving onto monthly. It managed their biggest bill (rent) on their behalf and deskilled them from proper budgeting.
Long terms benefit reciepients had lost the ability to budget and the prospect of getting paid employment that was monthly had become a factor acting against returning to work.
Having housing benefit paid to tenants instead of landlords has been the rule in private housing benefit since the Local Housing Allownace rules were brought in in 2007. For a landlord to get payments direct they have to show that tenants have a history of bad money management. Same rules that exist for private housing benefit. Initially UC was going to be much tougher to get rent paid direct but the government rolled back to the old rules.
I see a lot of frothing about Brexit - that makes a change.
On a different note is there any reason why we should want Patisserie Valerie to be saved ?
Aside from the dodgy finances its ratings on Trip Advisor are almost comically bad.
Sure the people losing their jobs might not be happy but we have low unemployment and record job vacancies and there are no shortage of other cake shops and cafes in every town.
Isn't creative destruction whereby land and labour is freed up by bad businesses closing down and made available to good businesses supposed to be part of free market capitalism ?
Indeed, I've heard it argued the worst thing we did in the GFC was nationalise RBS and pressure Lloyds to buy HBOS. In the capitalist system, no organisation should be deemed too big to fail.
There were two problems - one, the public order consequences of a banking collapse and second, none of the organisations had any kind of plan in place to allow for an orderly failure - it had simply never been contemplated.
Remainers can look at the younger generation and say I did the right thing for you . It’s not for those with little to lose to play roulette with the futures of those who have to live longest with the consequences .
Leavers can look at the younger generation and say I did the right thing for you. It’s not right for any citizen of voting age to cede powers to an undemocratic bureaucracy, removing future self-determination from those who have to live longest with the consequences.
You know that we're members of half a dozen bodies that involve us having ceded powers, and who have the ability to levy unlimited fines if we don't following the rulings of unelected bureaucrats, right?
Like that terrible organisation, the International Telecoms Union. (Bastards.)
Remainers can look at the younger generation and say I did the right thing for you . It’s not for those with little to lose to play roulette with the futures of those who have to live longest with the consequences .
Leavers can look at the younger generation and say I did the right thing for you. It’s not right for any citizen of voting age to cede powers to an undemocratic bureaucracy, removing future self-determination from those who have to live longest with the consequences.
You know that we're members of half a dozen bodies that involve us having ceded powers, and who have the ability to levy unlimited fines if we don't following the rulings of unelected bureaucrats, right?
Like that terrible organisation, the International Telecoms Union. (Bastards.)
Haha, yep. Slight difference between a political/economic union with 500 mil people and the ITU. But, point taken.
I see a lot of frothing about Brexit - that makes a change.
On a different note is there any reason why we should want Patisserie Valerie to be saved ?
Aside from the dodgy finances its ratings on Trip Advisor are almost comically bad.
Sure the people losing their jobs might not be happy but we have low unemployment and record job vacancies and there are no shortage of other cake shops and cafes in every town.
Isn't creative destruction whereby land and labour is freed up by bad businesses closing down and made available to good businesses supposed to be part of free market capitalism ?
These are Trip Advisor rankings for Patisserie Valerie for Dessert Restaurants:
Beverley 6th out of 6 Bradford 12th out of 17 Bury 10th out of 13 Chesterfield 4th out of 5 Doncaster 10th out of 10 Durham 6th out of 6 Huddersfield 10th out of 13 Leicester 25th out of 31 Lincoln 5th out of 9 Middlesbrough 6th out of 7 Nottingham 17th out of 20 Sheffield 18th out of 25
Perhaps Patisserie Valerie is highly regarded in Southern England but it wouldn't be any loss to places further north.
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
A second referendum is still democracy. It's not perfect by any means, certainly not in resolving things and given other, but nor would it be disrespecting democracy.
You also contradict others who argue that GE or referendum is necessary because people were not warned about this, at least as a serious possibility. Not just leavers making contradictory points.
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
The government is not advocating no deal it is advocating a deal, so why would they need to rethink Brexit entirely because no deal would be very bad? That doesn't make any sense.
It seems a very simple explanation. They are contemplating continuing with Brexit because that was voted for overwhelmingly by Parliament following the close result in the referendum.
A more sensible question is would they, in fact, contemplate continuing with Brexit on a no deal basis after issuing advice like that. But as they don't support no deal I am baffled as to why painting no deal as bad suggests there is no explanation as to why the government continues with Brexit.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
A second referendum is still democracy. It's not perfect by any means, certainly not in resolving things and given other, but nor would it be disrespecting democracy.
You also contradict others who argue that GE or referendum is necessary because people were not warned about this, at least as a serious possibility. Not just leavers making contradictory points.
Let us say we get another referendum and Remain wins, are we really going to expect Leavers like Farage, Gove, etc to go quietly?
We'll be in Neverendum land.
The only way this situation will be resolved is a few years outside the EU.
That's when we'll finally know if Remaining or Leaving is the best.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Nope. Referendum on May's crap betrayal deal, or whatever they end up calling it, no deal, or remain. Hardcore remainers and hardcore leavers will scream to high heaven about that, but if they believe their side would win they should no cry about the potential risk of getting the result they do not like, and enough softer leavers and softer remainers could conceivably back it, on the basis it gives them democratic cover for whatever wins.
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
What the HOC cannot allow is no deal
If TM stands firm against all sides and she brings a deal to the HOC they will decide and hopefully we will see grown ups acting in the national interest but I would not put money on it, sadly
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
The government is not advocating no deal it is advocating a deal, so why would they need to rethink Brexit entirely because no deal would be very bad? That doesn't make any sense.
It seems a very simple explanation. They are contemplating continuing with Brexit because that was voted for overwhelmingly by Parliament following the close result in the referendum.
A more sensible question is would they, in fact, contemplate continuing with Brexit on a no deal basis after issuing advice like that. But as they don't support no deal I am baffled as to why painting no deal as bad suggests there is no explanation as to why the government continues with Brexit.
It can advocate what it likes. No Deal is very real possibility, maybe even the most likely outcome.
We are juggling with our future prosperity. It is a stupid risk to take and the govt needs to be saying so, especially to the swivel-eyed loons in its own ranks.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
A second referendum is still democracy. It's not perfect by any means, certainly not in resolving things and given other, but nor would it be disrespecting democracy.
You also contradict others who argue that GE or referendum is necessary because people were not warned about this, at least as a serious possibility. Not just leavers making contradictory points.
Let us say we get another referendum and Remain wins, are we really going to expect Leavers like Farage, Gove, etc to go quietly?
We'll be in Neverendum land.
The only way this situation will be resolved is a few years outside the EU.
That's when we'll finally know if Remaining or Leaving is the best.
Yes, that's probably right. But the lack of long term resolution from a second referendum does not make having one disrespecting democracy, which was the claim. So long as another vote is equally as democratic as another, it is not disrespectful to hold another, even if it is believed to be unnecessary or unhelpful.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
It can advocate what it likes. No Deal is very real possibility, maybe even the most likely outcome.
We are juggling with our future prosperity. It is a stupid risk to take and the govt needs to be saying so, especially to the swivel-eyed loons in its own ranks.
I too think no deal is the most likely option, but contrary to your claim what the government is advocating is highly relevant, since your question was how they could contemplate proceeding with Brexit despite saying that no deal would be horrible, and the fact the government does not want and does not think no deal will happen explains and justifies that. Indeed, by releasing such papers it is doing what you say about no deal being a stupid risk, even if they still trot out the no deal is better than a bad deal line.
But it is simply not unreasonable to continue to pursue policy A when you say policy B is bad. If policy A is killed dead and they still proceed with policy B? Sure, that would be unreasonable, but that is not what you asked. If that were the case then no one could ever pursue any policy on the basis that the worst case scenario might happen instead.
So realpolitik suggests the Commons will have to find a Tory leader who can extract us from this mess, and my bet is that Tory leader's job will be to ask for an extension to A50, in which time we will be required to vote again, as our parliament is deadlocked.
And if our parliament is deadlocked then we seriously need to cancel Brexit and have a rethink. Perhaps offer the 2nd referendum after the cancellation because time is getting very short.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
You continue to put forward a position that will not happen and is only supported by a few hard brexiteers.
Indeed the more you push the more likely remain will be the ultimate destination
I still hope TM will get a deal and it is then for the HOC to decide
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
What the HOC cannot allow is no deal
If TM stands firm against all sides and she brings a deal to the HOC they will decide and hopefully we will see grown ups acting in the national interest but I would not put money on it, sadly
I can just about see her getting a deal through the Commons, remarkably enough, if she concedes enough to the point Labour rebels outweigh her own, and they are too gutless to provoke a leadership contest through a VONC. But even if that (highly improbable) scenario, it seems certain as a result that the DUP would pull support and the rebels would be even more active, and the government would collapse.
If she can get a Brexit agreement through, which I doubt, it may well be the last action the government takes.
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
The government also told us that there would be an immediate year long recession after a Leave vote.
After that there is a distinct shortage of credibility when it comes to other doom and disaster forecasts.
That's not to say that there might not be a risk of doom and disaster but who is to know which warnings to take seriously ?.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
A second referendum is still democracy. It's not perfect by any means, certainly not in resolving things and given other, but nor would it be disrespecting democracy.
You also contradict others who argue that GE or referendum is necessary because people were not warned about this, at least as a serious possibility. Not just leavers making contradictory points.
Let us say we get another referendum and Remain wins, are we really going to expect Leavers like Farage, Gove, etc to go quietly?
We'll be in Neverendum land.
The only way this situation will be resolved is a few years outside the EU.
That's when we'll finally know if Remaining or Leaving is the best.
This is quite right. If Leavers are wrong then the nation will vote to rejoin the EU later and the debate will be closed. If leaving is a success (which in reality means that there is not an obviously negative medium term impact) then there will be no desire to rejoin. Either way, the issue will be resolved.
This is what the referendum was about - a binary choice, in or out. We simply have to follow the verdict of the people. What is causing all the angst to be honest is that the Government is trying to avoid implementing the outcome because they don't think it is a good idea. This is going to destroy all faith in the political class and result in permanent division.
So realpolitik suggests the Commons will have to find a Tory leader who can extract us from this mess, and my bet is that Tory leader's job will be to ask for an extension to A50, in which time we will be required to vote again, as our parliament is deadlocked.
And if our parliament is deadlocked then we seriously need to cancel Brexit and have a rethink. Perhaps offer the 2nd referendum after the cancellation because time is getting very short.
That makes no sense. You are in effect demanding you get your preferred option before there is even a rethink to see if that is what Parliament, which voted overwhelmingly to begin the Brexit process, wants. A pause to allow a rethink (assuming that a pause is possible) which might result in cancellation is fair enough, but cancelling everything before a rethink to see if that is what is what parliament and the people want? That's pretty blatantly not about offering a time for a rethink.
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
You must realise companies are still moving here - no sane government tells companies to leave- think about it .
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Can somebody explain to me how the govt can even contemplate continuing with Brexit after issuing advice like this?
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
You must realise companies are still moving here - no sane government tells companies to leave- think about it .
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
So realpolitik suggests the Commons will have to find a Tory leader who can extract us from this mess, and my bet is that Tory leader's job will be to ask for an extension to A50, in which time we will be required to vote again, as our parliament is deadlocked.
And if our parliament is deadlocked then we seriously need to cancel Brexit and have a rethink. Perhaps offer the 2nd referendum after the cancellation because time is getting very short.
No, you can't just cancel Brexit. We voted for it, indeed we supported it with the biggest vote - 17.4 million people - given to any issue or party, in all of British history. WE have to decide if we have changed our minds. It doesn't just get "cancelled".
If there is a 2nd ref, I imagine the choice will be Remain, or No Deal Hard Brexit. It has the advantage of clarity.
UKIP would love a second Brexit referendum. Whatever happens, they'd win.
So realpolitik suggests the Commons will have to find a Tory leader who can extract us from this mess, and my bet is that Tory leader's job will be to ask for an extension to A50, in which time we will be required to vote again, as our parliament is deadlocked.
And if our parliament is deadlocked then we seriously need to cancel Brexit and have a rethink. Perhaps offer the 2nd referendum after the cancellation because time is getting very short.
No, you can't just cancel Brexit. We voted for it, indeed we supported it with the biggest vote - 17.4 million people - given to any issue or party, in all of British history. WE have to decide if we have changed our minds. It doesn't just get "cancelled".
If there is a 2nd ref, I imagine the choice will be Remain, or No Deal Hard Brexit. It has the advantage of clarity.
UKIP would love a second Brexit referendum. Whatever happens, they'd win.
Ultimately TM handed the negotiations to David Davis, Boris and Liam Fox and they all turned out to be utterly useless in fighting their cause and Boris only resigned because he had no choice when David Davis resigned first
They had their chance and now TM, or someone, has to get a deal and put it to the HOC. I expect it will pass but if not the HOC will move to a second referendum.
If any Brexiteers resign from cabinet I would expect them to be replaced by serious non Brexiteers including Amber Rudd and possibly Nicky Morgan
The ERG have lost their cause and they only have themselves to blame. Apart from Raab the rest are seriously overrated
As for the party, I have no idea what happens, but I expect it will heal in time, but that is not my immediate concern. Getting the withdrawal agreement and transistion is all that matters at present
Sorry but this is re-writing history. Firstly, Fox and Johnson had nothing to do with the negotiations at all. Secondly, DD has been clear that he was constantly over-ruled by May right from the start. He is on record saying he told her not to agree to the sequencing of talks, he told her not to offer the financial settlement and he told her not to offer the backstop. He told her to go for CETA from mid 2017. May deliberately sidelined DexEU because she knew that DD would (correctly) refuse to cross the redlines and would walk rather than cave in. So she set up a parallel negotiating unit and undermined him. This is all well known and not disputed.
Nobody is fooled. The negotiations were run by Remainers and the EU knew it and exploited it. It is their fault it has been a fiasco. And if the Leavers resign and they are replaced by the utterly talentless Rudd and Morgan, then it will just make the Tory disaster at the next election even more spectacular. The only people who can save you are the DUP and ERG who will reject May's deal, force No Deal and (assuming some new leadership) prove that there will be no disaster and we can then revisit the EU from a position of strength.
How can they? The ERG are barely a third of the Tory Party and the DUP just 10 MPs.
If May's plan does not go through you will likely end up with a Corbyn minority government in a few months pushing through an almost identical Customs Union plan anyway propped up by the SNP and LDs
If May's deal does not go through, she will resign and a Leaver will become Tory leader and PM.
Threatening betrayed Leavers with Corbyn will not work.
It will as there is no majority for No Deal in the Commons without a second referendum or a general election whoever leads the Tories
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
You continue to put forward a position that will not happen and is only supported by a few hard brexiteers.
Indeed the more you push the more likely remain will be the ultimate destination
I still hope TM will get a deal and it is then for the HOC to decide
A deal is not achievable since the position of the EU is incompatible with the UK's national interest. Remainers don't care, since they are happy to ignore the referendum result as far as possible, but it remains the truth. The reason that the deal will either never be signed or defeated is that it is simply not a viable outcome. I blame May, because I think a deal could have been done if she was tougher, but blame the EU if you like. But permanent backstop and/or the division of the nation is simply not acceptable.
Sorry for being inflammatory, but the reason that I do not take Remainers very seriously is that it is quite obvious that what is being demanded is not in the national interest, yet not a single Remainer seems to say that we should as a result leave with no deal (well, you did for a short while!). The answer is always that we need to accept anything because any form of leaving is a bad idea - this just means that they don't really accept the referendum result, which is what we have been complaining about the whole time.
It really should be simple at this stage. The 'deal' offered by the EU is utterly unacceptable and will cause long term damage to the UK, economically and politically. There should be no question of accepting it. If you accept we are leaving and we cannot accept a deal that is insulting, the only other action is to leave with no deal. And I believe that the UK public will accept this outcome because there really is not any other choice.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
A second referendum is still democracy. It's not perfect by any means, certainly not in resolving things and given other, but nor would it be disrespecting democracy.
You also contradict others who argue that GE or referendum is necessary because people were not warned about this, at least as a serious possibility. Not just leavers making contradictory points.
Let us say we get another referendum and Remain wins, are we really going to expect Leavers like Farage, Gove, etc to go quietly?
We'll be in Neverendum land.
The only way this situation will be resolved is a few years outside the EU.
That's when we'll finally know if Remaining or Leaving is the best.
But the Commons will not accept No Deal, and yet that is the default without *some* deal, but all of the suggested deals will also be rejected.
So realpolitik suggests the Commons will have to find a Tory leader who can extract us from this mess, and my bet is that Tory leader's job will be to ask for an extension to A50, in which time we will be required to vote again, as our parliament is deadlocked.
You may have a point but Corbyn prefers Brexit so he can engage in his Venezuela tribute act without the rules of the single market.
His ideal world is Brexit happening in which the Tories get the blame and he takes power.
For your scenario to happen Labour needs to be led by a passionate pro-EU leader.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
You continue to put forward a position that will not happen and is only supported by a few hard brexiteers.
Indeed the more you push the more likely remain will be the ultimate destination
I still hope TM will get a deal and it is then for the HOC to decide
A deal is not achievable since the position of the EU is incompatible with the UK's national interest. Remainers don't care, since they are happy to ignore the referendum result as far as possible, but it remains the truth. The reason that the deal will either never be signed or defeated is that it is simply not a viable outcome. I blame May, because I think a deal could have been done if she was tougher, but blame the EU if you like. But permanent backstop and/or the division of the nation is simply not acceptable.
Sorry for being inflammatory, but the reason that I do not take Remainers very seriously is that it is quite obvious that what is being demanded is not in the national interest, yet not a single Remainer seems to say that we should as a result leave with no deal (well, you did for a short while!). The answer is always that we need to accept anything because any form of leaving is a bad idea - this just means that they don't really accept the referendum result, which is what we have been complaining about the whole time.
It really should be simple at this stage. The 'deal' offered by the EU is utterly unacceptable and will cause long term damage to the UK, economically and politically. There should be no question of accepting it. If you accept we are leaving and we cannot accept a deal that is insulting, the only other action is to leave with no deal. And I believe that the UK public will accept this outcome because there really is not any other choice.
This is getting ridiculous. We need to cancel it soon.
Move to France. Better climate and without 52% of their population hell-bent on committing economic and political suicide
Not much better climate in northern France and of course 51% of French voted for either the Far Left Melenchon and Hamon or the Far Right Le Pen or Dupont Aignan in the first round of the French Presidential election last year
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
A second referendum is still democracy. It's not perfect by any means, certainly not in resolving things and given other, but nor would it be disrespecting democracy.
You also contradict others who argue that GE or referendum is necessary because people were not warned about this, at least as a serious possibility. Not just leavers making contradictory points.
Let us say we get another referendum and Remain wins, are we really going to expect Leavers like Farage, Gove, etc to go quietly?
We'll be in Neverendum land.
The only way this situation will be resolved is a few years outside the EU.
That's when we'll finally know if Remaining or Leaving is the best.
But the Commons will not accept No Deal, and yet that is the default without *some* deal, but all of the suggested deals will also be rejected.
So realpolitik suggests the Commons will have to find a Tory leader who can extract us from this mess, and my bet is that Tory leader's job will be to ask for an extension to A50, in which time we will be required to vote again, as our parliament is deadlocked.
You may have a point but Corbyn prefers Brexit so he can engage in his Venezuela tribute act without the rules of the single market.
His ideal world is Brexit happening in which the Tories get the blame and he takes power.
For your scenario to happen Labour needs to be led by a passionate pro-EU leader.
To engage his Venezuela tribute act and leave the single market Corbyn needs a clear majority (ideally having also deselected most Labour moderates before the election), on current polls Corbyn's only chance of becoming PM is with LD and SNP support
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Not even sure of that.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
A deal is not achievable since the position of the EU is incompatible with the UK's national interest. Remainers don't care, since they are happy to ignore the referendum result as far as possible, but it remains the truth. The reason that the deal will either never be signed or defeated is that it is simply not a viable outcome. I blame May, because I think a deal could have been done if she was tougher, but blame the EU if you like. But permanent backstop and/or the division of the nation is simply not acceptable.
Sorry for being inflammatory, but the reason that I do not take Remainers very seriously is that it is quite obvious that what is being demanded is not in the national interest, yet not a single Remainer seems to say that we should as a result leave with no deal (well, Big G did for a short while!). The answer is always that we need to accept anything because any form of leaving is a bad idea - this just means that they don't really accept the referendum result, which is what we have been complaining about the whole time.
It really should be simple at this stage. The 'deal' offered by the EU is utterly unacceptable and will cause long term damage to the UK, economically and politically. There should be no question of accepting it. If you accept we are leaving and we cannot accept a deal that is insulting, the only other action is to leave with no deal. And I believe that the UK public will accept this outcome because there really is not any other choice.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Not even sure of that.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
Which is why if Corbyn does get the keys to No 10 voters will likely only give them to him with Uncle Vince and Uncle Ian and Auntie Nichola being his guardians.
Corbyn will also almost certainly fail to win England anyway.
The US has another leftist to deal with in Lopez Obrador, Mexico's President elect and Corbyn's former holiday companion, right next door come his December 1st inaugration anyway
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Not even sure of that.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
I doubt that would gain much traction given the strength of Anti-Trump sentiment here.The messenger would have little credibility.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
The pound crashed the day after the referendum. It recovered. These things don't matter. Sturgeon already called another indyref and it was ignored. After no deal Brexit, Scottish independence becomes practically impossible.
We don't need to slash taxes to 'Singapore levels'. We simply need to do exactly what Bariner told us - repeal the EU regulations that cost billions of pounds and give ourselves a huge comparative advantage, just like he said. Oh, and implement unilateral free trade for a year or two, eliminating tariffs on imports which will drive down input costs for UK producers and retailers.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Not even sure of that.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
I doubt that would gain much traction given the strength of Anti-Trump sentiment here.The messenger would have little credibility.
You think so - The messenger does not dilute the message
Why would the US cooperate with Corbyn and his known sympathies.
Of course Corbyn could seek a defence deal with Putin being consistent with some of those in his office who have known pro Russia views
So the biggest act of self harm by a nation continues ! And not a single poll in 18 months has shown a majority who still think Brexit is a good idea . And yet the spivs and liars continue to parade around as if the country voted 80/20 to leave.
Barring a few saner voices the cabinet is full of delusional PM wannabes. These are dark times for the UK.
Maybe things have to be dark and getting darker for something dramatic to happen in relation to Brexit.
I always thought it would be a terrible path for the UK to follow, it is still not too late for a U - turn.
Unfortunately I think that ships sailed . Barring an unlikely second EU ref the demise of the UK will be cemented. And amazingly a large majority of Leavers support the break up of the UK , the next time a Leaver accuses Remainers of not being patriotic they need to look in the mirror .
Indeed, I could never see how supporting Leave, leading to a smaller economy, less money to spend on the military and so on is being patriotic. My experience of Leave supporters is that many of them do not understand how Brexit will affect the economy, trade and investment. Furthermore the fact immigration is going to continue Brexit or not will not satisfy Leavers. People voted Leave for many different reasons and the prospectus they were sold were lies that people chose to believe. My view is Brexit should be cancelled and as a result austerity ended, with an effort to reinvigorate those lives that have been left behind economically in recent years.
I do not understand pro-eu people who say the economy will be smaller but we need immigration to fulfil all the jobs that will be created.
A skills mismatch between the jobs on offer and the people in the workforce. You do realise that demographically we have an ageing population? That means some jobs such as in care homes for instance will be in great demand in the future as more elderly people with disabilities need care home support. British born people on the other hand want jobs that offer more progression, intellectual challenge or higher pay . Even in a slump an economy can have skill shortages in some areas. You are either being deliberately obtuse on immigration or you don't have the intellectual capacity to understand why it will still occur whether the UK Brexit's or not.
Tories = dimwits! We are truly f*cked in this country by a bunch of political pygmies from all parties. The UK is dying and fast (thanks to our clueless political class!)
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
The pound crashed the day after the referendum. It recovered. These things don't matter. Sturgeon already called another indyref and it was ignored. After no deal Brexit, Scottish independence becomes practically impossible.
We don't need to slash taxes to 'Singapore levels'. We simply need to do exactly what Bariner told us - repeal the EU regulations that cost billions of pounds and give ourselves a huge comparative advantage, just like he said. Oh, and implement unilateral free trade for a year or two, eliminating tariffs on imports which will drive down input costs for UK producers and retailers.
The temporary fall in the £ after the EU referendum result would be a mere drop in the ocean compared to if there was No Deal. After No Deal Brexit Scotland may well vote for independence on the latest polls, not to mention even English voters would vote Remain in a pre March EU ref rather than No Deal on every poll that has asked the question.
Of course we would have to slash taxes to Singapore levels to prevent a mass exodus of companies from the UK and how can we repeal every EU regulation without leading to huge border delays and goods checks and restrictions of trade in services between the UK and EU?
Eliminating tariffs on imports meanwhile would potentially put British farmers out of business to compound the predicament we faced
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
I doubt that Sturgeon would do that , but even if she did the agreement of the Westminster Parliament would not be forthcoming.
This is getting ridiculous. We need to cancel it soon.
Move to France. Better climate and without 52% of their population hell-bent on committing economic and political suicide
Not much better climate in northern France and of course 51% of French voted for either the Far Left Melenchon and Hamon or the Far Right Le Pen or Dupont Aignan in the first round of the French Presidential election last year
Hamon and DuPont Aignon are hardly off the wall extremists by any stretch.
This is getting ridiculous. We need to cancel it soon.
Move to France. Better climate and without 52% of their population hell-bent on committing economic and political suicide
Not much better climate in northern France and of course 51% of French voted for either the Far Left Melenchon and Hamon or the Far Right Le Pen or Dupont Aignan in the first round of the French Presidential election last year
Hamon and DuPont Aignon are hardly off the wall extremists by any stretch.
Hamon is not much different from Corbyn and DuPont Aignon basically a posher French version of Farage and endorsed Le Pen over Macron in the runoff, the only defeated First round candidate to do so
Tories = dimwits! We are truly f*cked in this country by a bunch of political pygmies from all parties. The UK is dying and fast (thanks to our clueless political class!)
I heard that this morning and have some sympathy with the government
Presently EV are beyond a lot of peoples pockets and they are subsidising those better off to the tune of £4,500 per EV. To reduce it to £3,500 is fairer to tax payers, indeed maybe it should be reduced further
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
I doubt that Sturgeon would do that , but even if she did the agreement of the Westminster Parliament would not be forthcoming.
Which risks her holding indyref2 anyway and then declaring UDI if she wins it and Westminster refuses to recognise the result, creating our very own Catalonia crisis at the same time as No Deal Brexit
So the biggest act of self harm by a nation continues ! And not a single poll in 18 months has shown a majority who still think Brexit is a good idea . And yet the spivs and liars continue to parade around as if the country voted 80/20 to leave.
Barring a few saner voices the cabinet is full of delusional PM wannabes. These are dark times for the UK.
Maybe things have to be dark and getting darker for something dramatic to happen in relation to Brexit.
I always thought it would be a terrible path for the UK to follow, it is still not too late for a U - turn.
Unfortunately I think that ships sailed . Barring an unlikely second EU ref the demise of the UK will be cemented. And amazingly a large majority of Leavers support the break up of the UK , the next time a Leaver accuses Remainers of not being patriotic they need to look in the mirror .
Indeed, I could never see how supporting Leave, leading to a smaller economy, less money to spend on the military and so on is being patriotic. My experience of Leave supporters is that many of them do not understand how Brexit will affect the economy, trade and investment. Furthermore the fact immigration is going to continue Brexit or not will not satisfy Leavers. People voted Leave for many different reasons and the prospectus they were sold were lies that people chose to believe. My view is Brexit should be cancelled and as a result austerity ended, with an effort to reinvigorate those lives that have been left behind economically in recent years.
I do not understand pro-eu people who say the economy will be smaller but we need immigration to fulfil all the jobs that will be created.
A skills mismatch between the jobs on offer and the people in the workforce. You do realise that demographically we have an ageing population? That means some jobs such as in care homes for instance will be in great demand in the future as more elderly people with disabilities need care home support. British born people on the other hand want jobs that offer more progression, intellectual challenge or higher pay . Even in a slump an economy can have skill shortages in some areas. You are either being deliberately obtuse on immigration or you don't have the intellectual capacity to understand why it will still occur whether the UK Brexit's or not.
Hmm - Immigrants all they are good for are wiping UK bums. UK people they need jobs that offer "intellectual challenge."
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
The pound crashed the day after the referendum. It recovered. These things don't matter. Sturgeon already called another indyref and it was ignored. After no deal Brexit, Scottish independence becomes practically impossible.
We don't need to slash taxes to 'Singapore levels'. We simply need to do exactly what Bariner told us - repeal the EU regulations that cost billions of pounds and give ourselves a huge comparative advantage, just like he said. Oh, and implement unilateral free trade for a year or two, eliminating tariffs on imports which will drive down input costs for UK producers and retailers.
The temporary fall in the £ after the EU referendum result would be a mere drop in the ocean compared to if there was No Deal. After No Deal Brexit Scotland may well vote for independence on the latest polls, not to mention even English voters would vote Remain in a pre March EU ref rather than No Deal on every poll that has asked the question.
Of course we would have to slash taxes to Singapore levels to prevent a mass exodus of companies from the UK and how can we repeal every EU regulation without leading to huge border delays and goods checks and restrictions of trade in services between the UK and EU?
Eliminating tariffs on imports meanwhile would potentially put British farmers out of business to compound the predicament we faced
A poor interpretation of project fear. Companies will not leave the UK - project fear predicted that there would be a huge exodus already - in fact almost nothing has happened.
Regulatory divergence will not lead to 'huge delays' at the border. It doesn't for non-EU imports now; why would it in future? After UFT has been in place for a year or so, the UK can get its customs set up (should have been done already) and EU imports will be treated with the same high level of efficiency we already apply to non-EU imports.
UK farmers don't really need tariff protection (that is reserved for EU farmers) and manufacturers really don't. But we can provide direct financial support for agriculture using the 40bn we don't need to give to Barnier. Agriculture is subsidised anyway.
All these issues are solvable given a competent Government. Shame your party cannot provide one.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
I doubt that Sturgeon would do that , but even if she did the agreement of the Westminster Parliament would not be forthcoming.
Which risks her holding indyref2 anyway and then declaring UDI if she wins it and Westminster refuses to recognise the result, creating our very own Catalonia crisis at the same time as No Deal Brexit
She will not call Indy 2 until the dust settles over brexit and even then, having seen how brexit has gone, may decide to put it on the backburners. It is not an issue at present
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Not even sure of that.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
I doubt that would gain much traction given the strength of Anti-Trump sentiment here.The messenger would have little credibility.
You think so - The messenger does not dilute the message
Why would the US cooperate with Corbyn and his known sympathies.
Of course Corbyn could seek a defence deal with Putin being consistent with some of those in his office who have known pro Russia views
I don't think criticism from Trump would damage Corbyn one iota - I rather suspect he would welcome it! I am not a Corbynite - and will not be voting Labour at the next election for unrelated reasons - but I have little doubt that such is the contempt for Trump in the UK that any leader who appears to antagonise him will enjoy enhanced popularity with the public at large.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
On current polls it will be simply be Vince Cable and Ian Blackford running the country rather than Arlene Foster, indeed the Tories would well win a majority in England and be the largest party but Corbyn still end up PM
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Not even sure of that.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
I doubt that would gain much traction given the strength of Anti-Trump sentiment here.The messenger would have little credibility.
You think so - The messenger does not dilute the message
Why would the US cooperate with Corbyn and his known sympathies.
Of course Corbyn could seek a defence deal with Putin being consistent with some of those in his office who have known pro Russia views
I don't think criticism from Trump would damage Corbyn one iota - I rather suspect he would welcome it! I am not a Corbynite - and will not be voting Labour at the next election for unrelated reasons - but I have little doubt that such is the contempt for Trump in the UK that any leader who appears to antagonise him will enjoy enhanced popularity with the public at large.
It woudn't, as the stock market at to get the UK on the front foot
The pound crashed the day after the referend drive down input costs for UK producers and retailers.
The temporary fall in the £ after the EU referendum result would be a mere drop in the ocean compared to if there was No Deal. After No Deal Brexit Scotland may well vote for independence on the latest polls, not to mention even English voters would vote Remain in a pre March EU ref rather than No Deal on every poll that has asked the question.
Of course we would have to slash taxes to Singapore levels to prevent a mass exodus of companies from the UK and how can we repeal every EU regulation without leading to huge border delays and goods checks and restrictions of trade in services between the UK and EU?
Eliminating tariffs on imports meanwhile would potentially put British farmers out of business to compound the predicament we faced
A poor interpretation of project fear. Companies will not leave the UK - project fear predicted that there would be a huge exodus already - in fact almost nothing has happened.
Regulatory divergence will not lead to 'huge delays' at the border. It doesn't for non-EU imports now; why would it in future? After UFT has been in place for a year or so, the UK can get its customs set up (should have been done already) and EU imports will be treated with the same high level of efficiency we already apply to non-EU imports.
UK farmers don't really need tariff protection (that is reserved for EU farmers) and manufacturers really don't. But we can provide direct financial support for agriculture using the 40bn we don't need to give to Barnier. Agriculture is subsidised anyway.
All these issues are solvable given a competent Government. Shame your party cannot provide one.
Nothing has happened as we are still in the EU and the single market, if we leave the EU and the single market and with no transition period or FTA either there will be an exodus of multinational companies to the continent unless we take a drastic slash tax and spending and slash regulation agenda to keep them here and there is little appetite for the yet further austerity that would require from either Parliament or the voters, not that either have much appetite for No Deal anyway.
Of course regulatory divergence will lead to huge delays and a year before customs are set up means lorries trailing halfway back through Kent.
UK farmers do need tariff protection if they are not going to be deluded by cheap meat from the rest of the world undercutting them and as you say any savings we make from the EU will end up largely having to go on agricultural subsidies as a result.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
I doubt that Sturgeon would do that , but even if she did the agreement of the Westminster Parliament would not be forthcoming.
Which risks her holding indyref2 anyway and then declaring UDI if she wins it and Westminster refuses to recognise the result, creating our very own Catalonia crisis at the same time as No Deal Brexit
Goodness me.
If there was no deal, Scotland cannot leave the UK. They would have to apply to join the EU which would take years and, of course, it would create a hard border between Scotland and England. Without access to the UK internal market, Scotland would be toast. Scottish independence is trumped by Brexit. It was only really viable when both parts were going to be in the EU. If Sturgeon ran off and held an illegal referendum, she would lose by a mile.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes leader.
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Abandon the negotiations. Put all Government efforts into preparing for a No Deal Brexit including making such arrangements with the EU are possible to mitigate issues. We are still six months out which is a good amount of time IF we could focus on what needs to be done, rather than wasting time chasing a deal which will never be agreed and ratified.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
I doubt that Sturgeon would do that , but even if she did the agreement of the Westminster Parliament would not be forthcoming.
Which risks her holding indyref2 anyway and then declaring UDI if she wins it and Westminster refuses to recognise the result, creating our very own Catalonia crisis at the same time as No Deal Brexit
Sturgeon would have more sense than to do that. Such a vote would be declared unlawful and probably boycotted by the Unionist supporters in Scotland.It would create a crisis - but one that is unlikely to rebound to the advantage of the SNP. Throughout the UK people are largely sick to death of Brexit - and in Scotland most voters have had enough of the Independence debate for years to come. The idea that after the extended trauma of Brexit that the Scottish electorate would happily embark on a further constitutional debate - with all the divisions that come with it - is frankly very counter -intuitive.
Tories = dimwits! We are truly f*cked in this country by a bunch of political pygmies from all parties. The UK is dying and fast (thanks to our clueless political class!)
The grants are being reduced not scrapped. You can't subsidise cars permanently. Now EVs are achieving some scale, manufacturers/customers have to pay more of the economic cost.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons
Meanwhile the dire threat of Corbyn winning a GE and the Trots running the country means the Tories will not risk their feeble hold on government.
It is a complete impasse. In that situation giving the decision back to the people seems the only "solution"? Unless someone has another idea....
Yes, because if the government collapses they would totally be united enough and coherent enough to remain at current polling levels.
Of course given Corbyn is the alternative and Labour is split too, maybe 30 Labour MPs will vote for May's deal. A Tory majority in England but Corbyn PM is the most likely outcome of a general election anytime soon
Not even sure of that.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
I doubt that would gain much traction given the strength of Anti-Trump sentiment here.The messenger would have little credibility.
You think so - The messenger does not dilute the message
Why would the US cooperate with Corbyn and his known sympathies.
Of course Corbyn could seek a defence deal with Putin being consistent with some of those in his office who have known pro Russia views
I don't think criticism from Trump would damage Corbyn one iota - I rather suspect he would welcome it! I am not a Corbynite - and will not be voting Labour at the next election for unrelated reasons - but I have little doubt that such is the contempt for Trump in the UK that any leader who appears to antagonise him will enjoy enhanced popularity with the public at large.
A poor interpretation of project fear. Companies will not leave the UK - project fear predicted that there would be a huge exodus already - in fact almost nothing has happened.
Regulatory divergence will not lead to 'huge delays' at the border. It doesn't for non-EU imports now; why would it in future? After UFT has been in place for a year or so, the UK can get its customs set up (should have been done already) and EU imports will be treated with the same high level of efficiency we already apply to non-EU imports.
UK farmers don't really need tariff protection (that is reserved for EU farmers) and manufacturers really don't. But we can provide direct financial support for agriculture using the 40bn we don't need to give to Barnier. Agriculture is subsidised anyway.
All these issues are solvable given a competent Government. Shame your party cannot provide one.
Nothing has happened as we are still in the EU and the single market, if we leave the EU and the single market and with no transition period or FTA either there will be an exodus of multinational companies to the continent unless we take a drastic slash tax and spending and slash regulation agenda to keep them here and there is little appetite for the yet further austerity that would require from either Parliament or the voters, not that either have much appetite for No Deal anyway.
Of course regulatory divergence will lead to huge delays and a year before customs are set up means lorries trailing halfway back through Kent.
UK farmers do need tariff protection if they are not going to be deluded by cheap meat from the rest of the world undercutting them and as you say any savings we make from the EU will end up largely having to go on agricultural subsidies as a result.
LOL. UK agriculture makes up 0.6% of UK value added GDP. Total income was 5.4bn. We are hardly going to need all the Brexit bill money to sort that out.
This is getting ridiculous. We need to cancel it soon.
It will be. Brexit is a clusterf*ck as many had predicted. Any pragmatic Government who truly cared for the national interest would re-visit the Referendum result (which was based on a pack of lies and a climate of xenophobia).
Brexit = a calamity. Brexiteers = idiots, fruitcakes and closest racists!
i demand an apology for that last comment
I demand an apology from everyone who voted leave.
Tories = dimwits! We are truly f*cked in this country by a bunch of political pygmies from all parties. The UK is dying and fast (thanks to our clueless political class!)
The grants are being reduced not scrapped. You can't subsidise cars permanently. Now EVs are achieving some scale, manufacturers/customers have to pay more of the economic cost.
Electric cars are still have dreadful spacial inefficiency and clog city streets.
The answer is to spend the money of congestion free alternatives i.e. rapid public transport and dedicated bike lanes to get the benefit from electric bikes.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
The pound crashed the day after the referendum. It recovered. These things don't matter. Sturgeon already called another indyref and it was ignored. After no deal Brexit, Scottish independence becomes practically impossible.
We don't need to slash taxes to 'Singapore levels'. We simply need to do exactly what Bariner told us - repeal the EU regulations that cost billions of pounds and give ourselves a huge comparative advantage, just like he said. Oh, and implement unilateral free trade for a year or two, eliminating tariffs on imports which will drive down input costs for UK producers and retailers.
The temporary fall in the £ after the EU referendum result would be a mere drop in the ocean compared to if there was No Deal. After No Deal Brexit Scotland may well vote for independence on the latest polls, not to mention even English voters would vote Remain in a pre March EU ref rather than No Deal on every poll that has asked the question.
Of course we would have to slash taxes to Singapore levels to prevent a mass exodus of companies from the UK and how can we repeal every EU regulation without leading to huge border delays and goods checks and restrictions of trade in services between the UK and EU?
Eliminating tariffs on imports meanwhile would potentially put British farmers out of business to compound the predicament we faced
I agree with you that No Deal would be VERY painful, though not Armageddon. It's worth avoiding if at all possible, but if it can't be avoided, we must grit our teeth and endure. We've been through worse.
I imagine the economy would take an immediate hit with a recession, a property crash, and a surge in unemployment. The £ would freefall. Etc.
The advantage is that we would be out out out. No £39bn, no obligations, entirely free. Ourselves alone.
We would have to rebuild a new country, but the EU would have no leverage. We could slash every tax and make speaking French a crime.
It would certainly be interesting. In the long term it might be very good for us.
Were it not for the sudden transition, that’s very tempting.
A poor interpretation of project fear. Companies will not leave the UK - project fear predicted that there would be a huge exodus already - in fact almost nothing has happened.
Regulatory divergence will not lead to 'huge delays' at the border. It doesn't for non-EU imports now; why would it in future? After UFT has been in place for a year or so, the UK can get its customs set up (should have been done already) and EU imports will be treated with the same high level of efficiency we already apply to non-EU imports.
UK farmers don't really need tariff protection (that is reserved for EU farmers) and manufacturers really don't. But we can provide direct financial support for agriculture using the 40bn we don't need to give to Barnier. Agriculture is subsidised anyway.
All these issues are solvable given a competent Government. Shame your party cannot provide one.
Nothing has happened as we are still in the EU and the single market, if we leave the EU and the single market and with no transition period or FTA either there will be an exodus of multinational companies to the continent unless we take a drastic slash tax and spending and slash regulation agenda to keep them here and there is little appetite for the yet further austerity that would require from either Parliament or the voters, not that either have much appetite for No Deal anyway.
Of course regulatory divergence will lead to huge delays and a year before customs are set up means lorries trailing halfway back through Kent.
UK farmers do need tariff protection if they are not going to be deluded by cheap meat from the rest of the world undercutting them and as you say any savings we make from the EU will end up largely having to go on agricultural subsidies as a result.
LOL. UK agriculture makes up 0.6% of UK value added GDP. Total income was 5.4bn. We are hardly going to need all the Brexit bill money to sort that out.
Agriculture subsidies serve no purpose, Taking money from taxes and giving it to farmers producing uneconomic products.
Australia and New Zealand scrapped subsidies decades ago, there's no reason why British farmers couldn't cope either
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Your sarcasm is noted, but I am being sincere.
I'm not sure I see any other way out of this now. TMay's plan will be voted down, she may have to resign, but the Tories do not have any other Brexit plan which can command the Commons, whoever becomes ..
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
I doubt that Sturgeon would do that , but even if she did the agreement of the Westminster Parliament would not be forthcoming.
Which risks her holding indyref2 anyway and then declaring UDI if she wins it and Westminster refuses to recognise the result, creating our very own Catalonia crisis at the same time as No Deal Brexit
Goodness me.
If there was no deal, Scotland cannot leave the UK. They would have to apply to join the EU which would take years and, of course, it would create a hard border between Scotland and England. Without access to the UK internal market, Scotland would be toast. Scottish independence is trumped by Brexit. It was only really viable when both parts were going to be in the EU. If Sturgeon ran off and held an illegal referendum, she would lose by a mile.
Your last sentence has no knowledge of the Scots or Scots nationalism.
I have lived with Scots nationalism since I was at primary scool in Berwick on Tweed when Nicola's predecessor of the 1950s used to paint a white border across the Berwick border bridge announcing Berwick belonging to Scotland. It would be removed and she would come back
I have many Scots relatives who are ardent nationalists and if the UK takes Scotland out in a no deal exit your last sentence would be toast The anger in Scotland could well back Nicola in holding her own referendum. I see it increasingly on our families social media, with even unionist Scots wavering
You do set yourself up as an expert on so much but on this you know nothing of the Scots nature and their increasing anger towards the English
I agree with you that No Deal would be VERY painful, though not Armageddon. It's worth avoiding if at all possible, but if it can't be avoided, we must grit our teeth and endure. We've been through worse.
I imagine the economy would take an immediate hit with a recession, a property crash, and a surge in unemployment. The £ would freefall. Etc.
The advantage is that we would be out out out. No £39bn, no obligations, entirely free. Ourselves alone.
We would have to rebuild a new country, but the EU would have no leverage. We could slash every tax and make speaking French a crime.
It would certainly be interesting. In the long term it might be very good for us.
Were it not for the sudden transition, that’s very tempting.
I'm not in favour of large tax cuts - the £39 billion saved could and should be used for infrastructure, resolving social care and a host of other things. It shouldn't be seen as a signal to cut taxes - that's never ended well in the past.
I didn't vote LEAVE to live in Singapore-on-Thames or even Caracas-on-Thames.
I agree with you that No Deal would be VERY painful, though not Armageddon. It's worth avoiding if at all possible, but if it can't be avoided, we must grit our teeth and endure. We've been through worse.
I imagine the economy would take an immediate hit with a recession, a property crash, and a surge in unemployment. The £ would freefall. Etc.
The advantage is that we would be out out out. No £39bn, no obligations, entirely free. Ourselves alone.
We would have to rebuild a new country, but the EU would have no leverage. We could slash every tax and make speaking French a crime.
It would certainly be interesting. In the long term it might be very good for us.
Were it not for the sudden transition, that’s very tempting.
I'm not in favour of large tax cuts - the £39 billion saved could and should be used for infrastructure, resolving social care and a host of other things. It shouldn't be seen as a signal to cut taxes - that's never ended well in the past.
I didn't vote LEAVE to live in Singapore-on-Thames or even Caracas-on-Thames.
I wasn’t referring to the opportunity to cut taxes; I was referring to the freedom, no obligations and ability to build anew.
This is getting ridiculous. We need to cancel it soon.
It will be. Brexit is a clusterf*ck as many had predicted. Any pragmatic Government who truly cared for the national interest would re-visit the Referendum result (which was based on a pack of lies and a climate of xenophobia).
Brexit = a calamity. Brexiteers = idiots, fruitcakes and closest racists!
i demand an apology for that last comment
I demand an apology from everyone who voted leave.
I apologise.
Why should you?
I shouldn't, but it seems like it will make him feel better.
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption.
I doubt that Sturgeon would do that , but even if she did the agreement of the Westminster Parliament would not be forthcoming.
Which risks her holding indyref2 anyway and then declaring UDI if she wins it and Westminster refuses to recognise the result, creating our very own Catalonia crisis at the same time as No Deal Brexit
Goodness me.
If there was no deal, Scotland cannot leave the UK. They would have to apply to join the EU which would take years and, of course, it would create a hard border between Scotland and England. Without access to the UK internal market, Scotland would be toast. Scottish independence is trumped by Brexit. It was only really viable when both parts were going to be in the EU. If Sturgeon ran off and held an illegal referendum, she would lose by a mile.
Your last sentence has no knowledge of the Scots or Scots nationalism.
I have lived with Scots nationalism since I was at primary scool in Berwick on Tweed when Nicola's predecessor of the 1950s used to paint a white border across the Berwick border bridge announcing Berwick belonging to Scotland. It would be removed and she would come back
I have many Scots relatives who are ardent nationalists and if the UK takes Scotland out in a no deal exit your last sentence would be toast The anger in Scotland could well back Nicola in holding her own referendum. I see it increasingly on our families social media, with even unionist Scots wavering
You do set yourself up as an expert on so much but on this you know nothing of the Scots nature and their increasing anger towards the English
I can well imagine ardent nationalists taking that view - but not the average voter in Scotland. Most people throughout the UK - whether in Scotland, Wales, England or Northern Ireland - are heartily sick of Brexit. The major setback suffered by the SNP at the 2017 election was also clear evidence that so many there wish to move on from the Independence Referendum.
Tories = dimwits! We are truly f*cked in this country by a bunch of political pygmies from all parties. The UK is dying and fast (thanks to our clueless political class!)
The grants are being reduced not scrapped. You can't subsidise cars permanently. Now EVs are achieving some scale, manufacturers/customers have to pay more of the economic cost.
If you look at the product roadmaps for almost all auto manufacturers it's hard to see why any subsidy is needed. Hyrbids and EVs will be the norm a lot sooner than people seem to think.
And I'm damned if I can figure out why my neighbours deserve a subsidy to buy a Tesla Model S.
Tories = dimwits! We are truly f*cked in this country by a bunch of political pygmies from all parties. The UK is dying and fast (thanks to our clueless political class!)
I heard that this morning and have some sympathy with the government
Presently EV are beyond a lot of peoples pockets and they are subsidising those better off to the tune of £4,500 per EV. To reduce it to £3,500 is fairer to tax payers, indeed maybe it should be reduced further
It's not a purely financial transaction though. The improvement in air quality cannot be measured in £ easily, but it is a huge tangible benefit. A very short-sighted decision by the Government.
So the biggest act of self harm by a nation continues ! And not a single poll in 18 months has shown a majority who still think Brexit is a good idea . And yet the spivs and liars continue to parade around as if the country voted 80/20 to leave.
Barring a few saner voices the cabinet is full of delusional PM wannabes. These are dark times for the UK.
Maybe things have to be dark and getting darker for something dramatic to happen in relation to Brexit.
I always thought it would be a terrible path for the UK to follow, it is still not too late for a U - turn.
Unfortunately I think that ships sailed . Barring an unlikely second EU ref the demise of the UK will be cemented. And amazingly a large majority of Leavers support the break up of the UK , the next time a Leaver accuses Remainers of not being patriotic they need to look in the mirror .
Indeed, I could never see how supporting Leave, leading to a smaller economy, less money to spend on the military and so on is being patriotic. My experience of Leave supporters is that many of them do not understand how Brexit will affect the economy, trade and investment. Furthermore the fact immigration is going to continue Brexit or not will not satisfy Leavers. People voted Leave for many different reasons and the prospectus they were sold were lies that people chose to believe. My view is Brexit should be cancelled and as a result austerity ended, with an effort to reinvigorate those lives that have been left behind economically in recent years.
I do not understand pro-eu people who say the economy will be smaller but we need immigration to fulfil all the jobs that will be created.
It’s sort of funny, given that pro-EU people constantly abuse and mock Brexiteers for being narrow minded, insular and racist Little Englanders and reject any sense of pride in nationhood as backward and regressive, and the cause of the past, and promote their cause entirely by luvvies and politicians on the Left who depsise any real sense of patriotism or pride in this country’s institutions.
And they wonder why Remain struggled to win over patriotic voters?
So the biggest act of self harm by a nation continues ! And not a single poll in 18 months has shown a majority who still think Brexit is a good idea . And yet the spivs and liars continue to parade around as if the country voted 80/20 to leave.
Barring a few saner voices the cabinet is full of delusional PM wannabes. These are dark times for the UK.
Maybe things have to be dark and getting darker for something dramatic to happen in relation to Brexit.
I always thought it would be a terrible path for the UK to follow, it is still not too late for a U - turn.
Unfortunately I think that ships sailed . Barring an unlikely second EU ref the demise of the UK will be cemented. And amazingly a large majority of Leavers support the break up of the UK , the next time a Leaver accuses Remainers of not being patriotic they need to look in the mirror .
Indeed, I could never see how supporting Leave, leading to a smaller economy, less money to spend on the military and so on is being patriotic. My experience of Leave supporters is that many of them do not understand how Brexit will affect the economy, trade and investment. Furthermore the fact immigration is going to continue Brexit or not will not satisfy Leavers. People voted Leave for many different reasons and the prospectus they were sold were lies that people chose to believe. My view is Brexit should be cancelled and as a result austerity ended, with an effort to reinvigorate those lives that have been left behind economically in recent years.
I do not understand pro-eu people who say the economy will be smaller but we need immigration to fulfil all the jobs that will be created.
It’s sort of funny, given that pro-EU people constantly abuse and mock Brexiteers for being narrow minded, insular and racist Little Englanders and reject any sense of pride in nationhood as backward and regressive, and the cause of the past, and promote their cause entirely by luvvies and politicians on the Left who depsise any real sense of patriotism or pride in this country’s institutions.
And they wonder why Remain struggled to win over patriotic voters?
The World has moved on - another one that has been left behind!
Comments
On a different note is there any reason why we should want Patisserie Valerie to be saved ?
Aside from the dodgy finances its ratings on Trip Advisor are almost comically bad.
Sure the people losing their jobs might not be happy but we have low unemployment and record job vacancies and there are no shortage of other cake shops and cafes in every town.
Isn't creative destruction whereby land and labour is freed up by bad businesses closing down and made available to good businesses supposed to be part of free market capitalism ?
Wind generation up to 10.5GW, an all-time record for the UK I think.
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
Women
Right to leave - 36%
Wrong to leave - 49%
Men
Right to leave - 44%
Wrong to leave - 45%
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/it0744dii4/TheTimes_181009_VI_Trackers_W.pdf
Will we still be in Basel III? God help us if we are not
UC is about making it as easy as possible to go back to work. The difficulty people have moving from a weekly to a monthly budget was one of the larger barriers to work. The benefits system kept people in a weekly system of payments while the world of work was mostly moving onto monthly. It managed their biggest bill (rent) on their behalf and deskilled them from proper budgeting.
Long terms benefit reciepients had lost the ability to budget and the prospect of getting paid employment that was monthly had become a factor acting against returning to work.
Having housing benefit paid to tenants instead of landlords has been the rule in private housing benefit since the Local Housing Allownace rules were brought in in 2007. For a landlord to get payments direct they have to show that tenants have a history of bad money management. Same rules that exist for private housing benefit. Initially UC was going to be much tougher to get rent paid direct but the government rolled back to the old rules.
There were two problems - one, the public order consequences of a banking collapse and second, none of the organisations had any kind of plan in place to allow for an orderly failure - it had simply never been contemplated.
Like that terrible organisation, the International Telecoms Union. (Bastards.)
We must respect democracy, the people were warned this was a possibility but they still voted for it.
Are you watching Mourinho
Beverley 6th out of 6
Bradford 12th out of 17
Bury 10th out of 13
Chesterfield 4th out of 5
Doncaster 10th out of 10
Durham 6th out of 6
Huddersfield 10th out of 13
Leicester 25th out of 31
Lincoln 5th out of 9
Middlesbrough 6th out of 7
Nottingham 17th out of 20
Sheffield 18th out of 25
Perhaps Patisserie Valerie is highly regarded in Southern England but it wouldn't be any loss to places further north.
"... Previous releases of no-deal papers -- Friday’s is the fourth -- have shown businesses face more red tape in the event of Britain tumbling out of the bloc without an agreement. The latest batch were no different, outlining a series of bureaucratic burdens both EU and British companies operating across the border may face.
In one of the more surprising revelations Friday, public companies with a Societas Europaea designation were even told they may want to quit the country. ..."
And do not give me any twaddle about "respecting democracy". When your employer tells you to put a gun to your head and pull the trigger it is time to have a *really* in-depth discussion rather than blithely doing as you are told..
When the govt tells companies to flee, it must be time for a rethink?
You also contradict others who argue that GE or referendum is necessary because people were not warned about this, at least as a serious possibility. Not just leavers making contradictory points.
It seems a very simple explanation. They are contemplating continuing with Brexit because that was voted for overwhelmingly by Parliament following the close result in the referendum.
A more sensible question is would they, in fact, contemplate continuing with Brexit on a no deal basis after issuing advice like that. But as they don't support no deal I am baffled as to why painting no deal as bad suggests there is no explanation as to why the government continues with Brexit.
We'll be in Neverendum land.
The only way this situation will be resolved is a few years outside the EU.
That's when we'll finally know if Remaining or Leaving is the best.
If TM stands firm against all sides and she brings a deal to the HOC they will decide and hopefully we will see grown ups acting in the national interest but I would not put money on it, sadly
See my post of 7.48.
We are juggling with our future prosperity. It is a stupid risk to take and the govt needs to be saying so, especially to the swivel-eyed loons in its own ranks.
If the UK entered No Deal on the front foot, rather than being forced into it, with an aggressive policy posture it would pass without significant disruption. The Government could then go back to the EU and negotiate from a position of strength.
But it is simply not unreasonable to continue to pursue policy A when you say policy B is bad. If policy A is killed dead and they still proceed with policy B? Sure, that would be unreasonable, but that is not what you asked. If that were the case then no one could ever pursue any policy on the basis that the worst case scenario might happen instead.
Indeed the more you push the more likely remain will be the ultimate destination
I still hope TM will get a deal and it is then for the HOC to decide
If she can get a Brexit agreement through, which I doubt, it may well be the last action the government takes.
After that there is a distinct shortage of credibility when it comes to other doom and disaster forecasts.
That's not to say that there might not be a risk of doom and disaster but who is to know which warnings to take seriously ?.
This is what the referendum was about - a binary choice, in or out. We simply have to follow the verdict of the people. What is causing all the angst to be honest is that the Government is trying to avoid implementing the outcome because they don't think it is a good idea. This is going to destroy all faith in the political class and result in permanent division.
Good night all.
It woudn't, as the stock market and £ would crash through the floor the day after No Deal and Sturgeon would then call indyref2 the week after.
Unless the UK suddenly slashed tax to Singapore levels and spending too within 6 months there would be little way out of that to get the UK on the front foot
https://order-order.com/2018/10/11/spanish-train-firm-picks-uk-massive-factory/
Leave
Remain
His ideal world is Brexit happening in which the Tories get the blame and he takes power.
For your scenario to happen Labour needs to be led by a passionate pro-EU leader.
Comments coming out of the US recently said that Corbyn would be an ever present danger to the US with his known connections to Hamas and anti West views and that the US would withdraw all security and defence cooperation with the UK
Now that would be interesting if that was repeated in an election campaign
Sorry for being inflammatory, but the reason that I do not take Remainers very seriously is that it is quite obvious that what is being demanded is not in the national interest, yet not a single Remainer seems to say that we should as a result leave with no deal (well, Big G did for a short while!). The answer is always that we need to accept anything because any form of leaving is a bad idea - this just means that they don't really accept the referendum result, which is what we have been complaining about the whole time.
It really should be simple at this stage. The 'deal' offered by the EU is utterly unacceptable and will cause long term damage to the UK, economically and politically. There should be no question of accepting it. If you accept we are leaving and we cannot accept a deal that is insulting, the only other action is to leave with no deal. And I believe that the UK public will accept this outcome because there really is not any other choice.
Corbyn will also almost certainly fail to win England anyway.
The US has another leftist to deal with in Lopez Obrador, Mexico's President elect and Corbyn's former holiday companion, right next door come his December 1st inaugration anyway
We don't need to slash taxes to 'Singapore levels'. We simply need to do exactly what Bariner told us - repeal the EU regulations that cost billions of pounds and give ourselves a huge comparative advantage, just like he said. Oh, and implement unilateral free trade for a year or two, eliminating tariffs on imports which will drive down input costs for UK producers and retailers.
Why would the US cooperate with Corbyn and his known sympathies.
Of course Corbyn could seek a defence deal with Putin being consistent with some of those in his office who have known pro Russia views
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/12/scrapping-uk-grants-for-hybrid-cars-astounding-says-industry
Tories = dimwits! We are truly f*cked in this country by a bunch of political pygmies from all parties. The UK is dying and fast (thanks to our clueless political class!)
Of course we would have to slash taxes to Singapore levels to prevent a mass exodus of companies from the UK and how can we repeal every EU regulation without leading to huge border delays and goods checks and restrictions of trade in services between the UK and EU?
Eliminating tariffs on imports meanwhile would potentially put British farmers out of business to compound the predicament we faced
Presently EV are beyond a lot of peoples pockets and they are subsidising those better off to the tune of £4,500 per EV. To reduce it to £3,500 is fairer to tax payers, indeed maybe it should be reduced further
UK people they need jobs that offer "intellectual challenge."
Regulatory divergence will not lead to 'huge delays' at the border. It doesn't for non-EU imports now; why would it in future? After UFT has been in place for a year or so, the UK can get its customs set up (should have been done already) and EU imports will be treated with the same high level of efficiency we already apply to non-EU imports.
UK farmers don't really need tariff protection (that is reserved for EU farmers) and manufacturers really don't. But we can provide direct financial support for agriculture using the 40bn we don't need to give to Barnier. Agriculture is subsidised anyway.
All these issues are solvable given a competent Government. Shame your party cannot provide one.
People who ‘follow through’ look pretty silly too!
Of course regulatory divergence will lead to huge delays and a year before customs are set up means lorries trailing halfway back through Kent.
UK farmers do need tariff protection if they are not going to be deluded by cheap meat from the rest of the world undercutting them and as you say any savings we make from the EU will end up largely having to go on agricultural subsidies as a result.
If there was no deal, Scotland cannot leave the UK. They would have to apply to join the EU which would take years and, of course, it would create a hard border between Scotland and England. Without access to the UK internal market, Scotland would be toast. Scottish independence is trumped by Brexit. It was only really viable when both parts were going to be in the EU. If Sturgeon ran off and held an illegal referendum, she would lose by a mile.
The answer is to spend the money of congestion free alternatives i.e. rapid public transport and dedicated bike lanes to get the benefit from electric bikes.
Could the end result be 52 - 48 to England?
Australia and New Zealand scrapped subsidies decades ago, there's no reason why British farmers couldn't cope either
I have lived with Scots nationalism since I was at primary scool in Berwick on Tweed when Nicola's predecessor of the 1950s used to paint a white border across the Berwick border bridge announcing Berwick belonging to Scotland. It would be removed and she would come back
I have many Scots relatives who are ardent nationalists and if the UK takes Scotland out in a no deal exit your last sentence would be toast The anger in Scotland could well back Nicola in holding her own referendum. I see it increasingly on our families social media, with even unionist Scots wavering
You do set yourself up as an expert on so much but on this you know nothing of the Scots nature and their increasing anger towards the English
I didn't vote LEAVE to live in Singapore-on-Thames or even Caracas-on-Thames.
And I'm damned if I can figure out why my neighbours deserve a subsidy to buy a Tesla Model S.
And they wonder why Remain struggled to win over patriotic voters?