DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
It leads transition payments but the principle is sound
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
The most obvious thing Hammond could do in the Budget is to make provision to over-turn Osbourne's nasty little insistence that it be paid in arrears. Pay it in advance - and many of the issues go away. It would buy considerable (and much-needed) good will for this Government.
The idea of paying UC in arrears was to smooth the path to employment (or increased hours) when you also get paid in arrears.
Paying in advance would leave too long a period without getting paid when entering work and would be a disincentive to move into work.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Exactly. Who would benefit from a Corbyn government? The poor. The disabled. The millions working flat out who are flat broke. I love it when Tories bang on about the supposed immorality of Corbyn when presiding over the brutal abuse they are chosing to hurl at people too ill to defend themselves.
Given every Labour government adds to the unemployment figures and wrecks the finances of the nation, I remain sceptical.
Labour are brilliant at signalling their virtue; not so hot on delivery.
There is a hard limit to how much government can do to improve the lot of citizens. The capitalist economy can do an awful lot more.
Labour has generally left the economy in a better state than outgoing Tory Governments. In June 1970 the Tories inherited both a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus - rather than the huge Balance of Payments Deficit bequeathed to Labour in October 1964. In May 1979 Thatcher took over an economy with significantly lower inflation than Labour faced in March 1974 when Heath left office. The economy was growing, unemployment had been falling and both the Budgetary and Balance of Payments position was stronger than in 1974.
More unemployed.
Having a job impacts us ordinary folk more than the BoP.
But in Callaghan's last year unemployment was falling. When Heath departed it was rising.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Exactly. Who would benefit from a Corbyn government? The poor. The disabled. The millions working flat out who are flat broke. I love it when Tories bang on about the supposed immorality of Corbyn when presiding over the brutal abuse they are chosing to hurl at people too ill to defend themselves.
Given every Labour government adds to the unemployment figures and wrecks the finances of the nation, I remain sceptical.
Labour are brilliant at signalling their virtue; not so hot on delivery.
There is a hard limit to how much government can do to improve the lot of citizens. The capitalist economy can do an awful lot more.
Labour has generally left the economy in a better state than outgoing Tory Governments. In June 1970 the Tories inherited both a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus - rather than the huge Balance of Payments Deficit bequeathed to Labour in October 1964. In May 1979 Thatcher took over an economy with significantly lower inflation than Labour faced in March 1974 when Heath left office. The economy was growing, unemployment had been falling and both the Budgetary and Balance of Payments position was stronger than in 1974.
The scale of the mess in 2010 is extraordinary when we think about it. About £140 billion deficit. This wasn’t just money splurged on new highways and schools. This was an expansion of the state and the people that worked for it. A structural deficit.
We had record spending, but not the taxes to fund it. Labour revelled in how difficult it would be for w government to reign back public spending.
Even if we are back to ignoring the global financial crisis, the economy was recovering under Labour till Osborne flat-lined it.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
The most obvious thing Hammond could do in the Budget is to make provision to over-turn Osbourne's nasty little insistence that it be paid in arrears. Pay it in advance - and many of the issues go away. It would buy considerable (and much-needed) good will for this Government.
Indeed. And since most take an advance anyway...instead of deducting any monies owed from the first payment leaving people short, why not deduct from the last payment?
That would be an incentive to stay in the UC system instead of getting work (or more hours).
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Exactly. Who would benefit from a Corbyn government? The poor. The disabled. The millions working flat out who are flat broke. I love it when Tories bang on about the supposed immorality of Corbyn when presiding over the brutal abuse they are chosing to hurl at people too ill to defend themselves.
Given every Labour government adds to the unemployment figures and wrecks the finances of the nation, I remain sceptical.
Labour are brilliant at signalling their virtue; not so hot on delivery.
There is a hard limit to how much government can do to improve the lot of citizens. The capitalist economy can do an awful lot more.
Labour has generally left the economy in a better state than outgoing Tory Governments. In June 1970 the Tories inherited both a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus - rather than the huge Balance of Payments Deficit bequeathed to Labour in October 1964. In May 1979 Thatcher took over an economy with significantly lower inflation than Labour faced in March 1974 when Heath left office. The economy was growing, unemployment had been falling and both the Budgetary and Balance of Payments position was stronger than in 1974.
The scale of the mess in 2010 is extraordinary when we think about it. About £140 billion deficit. This wasn’t just money splurged on new highways and schools. This was an expansion of the state and the people that worked for it. A structural deficit.
We had record spending, but not the taxes to fund it. Labour revelled in how difficult it would be for w government to reign back public spending.
The deficit was mainly caused by the collapse in Tax revenues from the Financial sector rather than a surge in expenditure - with the financial crisis in the banking sector eventually leading to an economic crisis. The Tories were committed to matching Labour's spending plans.
Are there some Labour MPs would would not support Corbyn for PM and abstain?
Corbyn can expect the same support from LAB MPs as he provided when he was a backbench MP under Blair
Though of course, while Corbyn was a regular rebel against specific policy ideas, he never to my knowledge tried to prevent Blair taking office. There were a couple of (failed) motions of no confidence put to the Commons in the final years of the Major government, did Corbyn support them?
Whilst I'm OK with MPs rebelling on certain policy issues (personally I'd even be alright with them rebelling to support a reasonable Brexit deal, though many other Labour MPs definitely wouldn't be), any MP who tried to prevent an election coming about / prevent Corbyn becoming PM would 100% be deselected.
Oh dear. A Labour government. A Corbyn premiership. Without even needing a General Election. And its entirely self-inflicted by the cretin Cameron and Mrs MayBeUseless.
No wonder PB Tories sound like stroppy children this morning.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Exactly. Who would benefit from a Corbyn government? The poor. The disabled. The millions working flat out who are flat brokeg on about the supposed immorality of Corbyn when presiding over the brutal abuse they are chosing to hurl at people too ill to defend themselves.
Given every Labour government adds to the unemployment figures and wrecks the finances of the nation, I remain sceptical.
Labour are brilliant at signalling their virtue; not so hot on delivery.
There is a hard limit to how much government can do to improve the lot of citizens. The capitalist economy can do an awful lot more.
Labour has generally left the economy in a Balance of Payments Surplus to Labour in October 1964. In May 1979 Thatcher took over an economy with significantly lower inflation than Labour faced in March 1974 when Heath left office. The eco, unemployment had been falling and both the Budgetary and Balance of Payments position was stronger than in 1974.
The scale of the mess in 2010 is extraordinary when we think about it. About £140 billion deficit. This wasn’t just money splurged on new highways and schools. This was an expansion of the state and the people that worked for it. A structural deficit.
We had record spending, but not the taxes to fund it. Labour revelled in how difficult it would be for w government to reign back public spending.
Even if we are back to ignoring the global financial crisis, the economy was recovering under Labour till Osborne flat-lined it.
It’s the deficit. That was extraordinary. Far out of whack to anything previous with no path to bring it back.
The economy was only growing because of the huge dollars of fiscal stimulus. Which were only ever supposed to be temporary.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
The most obvious thing Hammond could do in the Budget is to make provision to over-turn Osbourne's nasty little insistence that it be paid in arrears. Pay it in advance - and many of the issues go away. It would buy considerable (and much-needed) good will for this Government.
Indeed. And since most take an advance anyway...instead of deducting any monies owed from the first payment leaving people short, why not deduct from the last payment?
That would be an incentive to stay in the UC system instead of getting work (or more hours).
But most UC claimants are in work already. There are precious few people around willing and able to work who can't find any. You may equally argue that it would be a disincentive to take a pay rise, a promotion, or a better job. Which would be silly.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
The most obvious thing Hammond could do in the Budget is to make provision to over-turn Osbourne's nasty little insistence that it be paid in arrears. Pay it in advance - and many of the issues go away. It would buy considerable (and much-needed) good will for this Government.
Indeed. And since most take an advance anyway...instead of deducting any monies owed from the first payment leaving people short, why not deduct from the last payment?
Nothing wrong with being in arrears. That’s how wages are paid. Life in benefits should be as close to work as possible. Where you have a point however was Osbourne’s delay before being able to apply. That’s the unnecessary bit.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Exactly. Who would benefit from a Corbyn government? The poor. The disabled. The millions working flat out who are flat broke. I love it when Tories bang on about the supposed immorality of Corbyn when presiding over the brutal abuse they are chosing to hurl at people too ill to defend themselves.
Given every Labour government adds to the unemployment figures and wrecks the finances of the nation, I remain sceptical.
Labour are brilliant at signalling their virtue; not so hot on delivery.
There is a hard limit to how much government can do to improve the lot of citizens. The capitalist economy can do an awful lot more.
Labour has generally left the economy in a better state than outgoing Tory Governments. In June 1970 the Tories inherited both a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus - rather than the huge Balance of Payments Deficit bequeathed to Labour in October 1964. In May 1979 Thatcher took over an economy with significantly lower inflation than Labour faced in March 1974 when Heath left office. The economy was growing, unemployment had been falling and both the Budgetary and Balance of Payments position was stronger than in 1974.
More unemployed.
Having a job impacts us ordinary folk more than the BoP.
But in Callaghan's last year unemployment was falling. When Heath departed it was rising.
But but but.
You’re using one example that doesn’t even disprove my argument.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
It needs money, it needs time and it needs a lot of work.
But just like some large physical infrastructure project, it is an absolute necessity.
Not sure it is an absolute necessity. The goal of making it easier to move into work, or take on more hours, may well be highly laudable, but was any of this a necessity?
Yep, because the existing system disincentivises work.
That’s an entirely unsustainable system.
That seems to be the Schrodingers Tory paradox. The current welfare system disincentivises the workshy to move into work, yet we similtaneously have supposedly record employment.
I suspect neither view holds water.
How about many of the tax and benefits changes over the last decade have pushed people into the job market?
You say ‘supposedly record employment’. You doubt the figures?
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
It needs money, it needs time and it needs a lot of work.
But just like some large physical infrastructure project, it is an absolute necessity.
Not sure it is an absolute necessity. The goal of making it easier to move into work, or take on more hours, may well be highly laudable, but was any of this a necessity?
Yep, because the existing system disincentivises work.
That’s an entirely unsustainable system.
That seems to be the Schrodingers Tory paradox. The current welfare system disincentivises the workshy to move into work, yet we similtaneously have supposedly record employment.
I suspect neither view holds water.
How about many of the tax and benefits changes over the last decade have pushed people into the job market?
You say ‘supposedly record employment’. You doubt the figures?
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
It needs money, it needs time and it needs a lot of work.
But just like some large physical infrastructure project, it is an absolute necessity.
Not sure it is an absolute necessity. The goal of making it easier to move into work, or take on more hours, may well be highly laudable, but was any of this a necessity?
Yep, because the existing system disincentivises work.
That’s an entirely unsustainable system.
That seems to be the Schrodingers Tory paradox. The current welfare system disincentivises the workshy to move into work, yet we similtaneously have supposedly record employment.
I suspect neither view holds water.
How about many of the tax and benefits changes over the last decade have pushed people into the job market?
You say ‘supposedly record employment’. You doubt the figures?
Just saying that there is a mismatch between the Tory claim of record employment, and the claim that the existing benefits system disincentivises work.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
It leads transition payments but the principle is sound
That is true . Nevertheless. for those who can not work due to caring responsibilities looking after severely disabled children. The facts will not change DWP hold all the information.So they should migrate the information across. Surely the government can see that , and they would not want the bad publicity ot or a bad impact on such families. This is what people are supposed to do , point out the problems.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
I would have thought so Nigel. I am no computer expert .But surely DWP could migrate the information ? Without the requirement to re,-apply. Especially if the circumstances have not changed for many years.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Exactly. Who would benefit from a Corbyn government? The poor. The disabled. The millions working flat out who are flat broke. I love it when Tories bang on about the supposed immorality of Corbyn when presiding over the brutal abuse they are chosing to hurl at people too ill to defend themselves.
Given every Labour government adds to the unemployment figures and wrecks the finances of the nation, I remain sceptical.
Labour are brilliant at signalling their virtue; not so hot on delivery.
There is a hard limit to how much government can do to improve the lot of citizens. The capitalist economy can do an awful lot more.
Labour has generally left the economy in a better state than outgoing Tory Governments. In June 1970 the Tories inherited both a Budget Surplus and a Balance of Payments Surplus - rather than the huge Balance of Payments Deficit bequeathed to Labour in October 1964. In May 1979 Thatcher took over an economy with significantly lower inflation than Labour faced in March 1974 when Heath left office. The economy was growing, unemployment had been falling and both the Budgetary and Balance of Payments position was stronger than in 1974.
In 1997 unemployment and inflation and strikes were lower than in 1979
Unemployment 1979 - 1.4m Unemployment 1997 - 2.1m
& that was after 18 years of fiddling & pushing the unemployed onto disability.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implementcountries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fedthe assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
We only ever wanted a common market. A place to sell and buy widgets. We grew to like some of the other benefits that came with it, such as hassle free movement on holidays around the Eu. A sense of commonality in protection. Even things like the mobile roaming charges.
But, and there was a big but. There was a perception out there (which was entirely correct) that we put huge amounts of funds into the European Union and we get very little back. And now we have unlimited numbers of poor low skilled migrants from Eastern Europe who make little if any contribution to the country and we can do little about it
It seemed an unnecessarily expensive and complicated trade agreement. Which is all we ever wanted.
Yet the EU treated Cameron with disdain. Germnay’s fine. They’re a bigger net contributor than we are, but they essentially run the show. They are the England of the United Kingdom. We are and always have been even when much poorer the second largest net contributor. In our entire membership not once have we got more out than we put in. Yet we are treat like an embarrassing older uncle who doesn’t get the modern world.
Well, guess what we have.
I love the single market. I think the ECJ has done a great job of economically liberalising the continent and it has made us all richer because of it. The envormental regulations were imposed on us, against our will, but they have made our nation cleaner. Air and water as clean as it was around the industrial revolution. I like the knowledge, though I barely share it, or a club, a communitaire or similar nations with similar values. I tolerate the migration because of the benefits we get econicnally from the single market
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
One or two of us on here have been warning about UC for months and months.
The few billion to fix the hole, will stop at least the issue of several million families losing up to £2.4K a year.
That seems the bare minimum to me, to fix the UC nightmare, which, together with housing, will sink the Tories.
It needs money, it needs time and it needs a lot of work.
But just like some large physical infrastructure project, it is an absolute necessity.
Not sure it is an easier to move into work, or take on more hours, may well be highly laudable, but was any of this a necessity?
Yep, because the existing system disincentivises work.
That’s an entirely unsustainable system.
system disincentivises the workshy to move into work, yet we similtaneously have supposedly record employment.
I suspect neither view holds water.
How about many of the tax and benefits changes over the last decade have pushed people into the job market?
You say ‘supposedly record employment’. You doubt the figures?
Just saying that there is a mismatch between the Tory claim of record employment, and the claim that the existing benefits system disincentivises work.
The system has been revised over and over. I find it utterly extraordinary that people are now defending the original system. It created an awful trap for many people. UC is a bit of a holy grail. But the system it is replacing is unbelievable complicated.
Just as Mike pointed out in relation to resignation threats you have to follow through in order to be seen as credible in the future. If the DUP back down they have no leverage ever again. If they follow through everyone will remember that they brought down May's government - and take them appropriately seriously the next time they hold the balance of power.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
Corbyn was at least ironically slightly honest when he said that it could do better on a few things.
How about a campaign that said free movement restrictions exist but our lazy use,was government haven’t the wit to change the benefits and tax system to stop us distracting disproportionate numbers, that we don’t track them when they are here and we are perfectly free to boot out the freeloaders if we wish to. How about listing some of the things that have happened in the Eu because of us, and things that have happened in the uk because of the EU. How the Eu has been very slow at negotiating trade agreements in the past but now has agreed six new one over the last few years. Each one we would need to negotiate from a fresh by ourselves.
It’s not perfect, we pay in too much for what we get back but it’s stil, in our interests to stay in.
Speaking as a lifelong Conservative, the treachery and incompetence of Mrs May and the reluctance or inability of the Party to remove her mean that my vote will go elsewhere next time, regardless of the consequences.
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
I would have thought so Nigel. I am no computer expert .But surely DWP could migrate the information ? Without the requirement to re,-apply. Especially if the circumstances have not changed for many years.
The data and the system isn't the problem. The formula for calculating payments and the final figure that is derived and paid (after Osbourne butchered the amount available back in 2015) is....
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
I would have thought so Nigel. I am no computer expert .But surely DWP could migrate the information ? Without the requirement to re,-apply. Especially if the circumstances have not changed for many years.
I was a computer expert.
When introducing a new system I estimated costs/time as
One third systems analysis and programming
One third getting the historic data in the system corrected
One third implementing the system.
My guess is that the latter two items were under estimated for the Universal Credit system.
They didn’t say bring down the government , they said vote against st the Budget
Of course all the commentators think this is the same thing (at least implicitly)
But it isn’t. I’d see a vote against the Budget. Then an intense period of negotiation in which they say “I told you we were serious”. Then there will be a new Budget (and quite possibly a new PM) but not a vote to bring down the government
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
I would have thought so Nigel. I am no computer expert .But surely DWP could migrate the information ? Without the requirement to re,-apply. Especially if the circumstances have not changed for many years.
The DWP can't migrate information between two desks sat next to each other, never mind across systems.
The system has been revised over and over. I find it utterly extraordinary that people are now defending the original system. It created an awful trap for many people. UC is a bit of a holy grail. But the system it is replacing is unbelievable complicated.
No argument there. The previous system was Byzantine, with multiple benefits, some automatic, others means-tested, some taxable, others not. Some paid weekly, some fortnightly, others monthly. The argument is about the efficiency of the roll out, and the generosity of the system. People working on the system, those claiming, 30 Tory MPs, all agree there is a problem.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
Yes, I criticised it for negativity at the time.
The 1975 referendum was a lot more positive in its arguments, which is why Staying In won. Jezza benefited from positive campaigning in 2017. Politicians can often believe being negative about the opposition is sufficient, but voters seldom agree.
Just as Mike pointed out in relation to resignation threats you have to follow through in order to be seen as credible in the future. If the DUP back down they have no leverage ever again. If they follow through everyone will remember that they brought down May's government - and take them appropriately seriously the next time they hold the balance of power.
Exactly.
And the other aspect is that they're going to be mindful of what their own voters think. If they nod through a Brexit deal which is seen to "endanger the Union" or be "a step towards a United Ireland", there's great political risks for the DUP - risks which they know all about, since the main reason they became the main unionist party was because the UUP was seen to have "betrayed unionists" with the Good Friday Agreement.
The Tories are delusional to think the DUP's bottom line is going to be that the Tories must be kept in office at any cost. While I'm sure they have no love at all for Corbyn, and would prefer a Tory government if all other things were equal, they are not going to let it take priority over their own main interests (protecting "the Union" as they see it, protecting their own electoral fortunes, and protecting their leverage in future negotiations at Westminster).
DUP getting shafted, and a united Ireland within the EU would be so funny, it'd almost be worth the price of having a Corbyn-led Government. Eire's positions on gay marriage and abortion would, of course, have to be extended to the North. Come on Arlene ...
If there was a Corbyn led government there would be no hard border in Ireland and polls show Northern Ireland would comfortably vote then to still stay in the UK even if there was a border poll
HYFud any doubt on the migration of millions on to Universal Credit ?
You seem a sensible conservative. Take my advice it will be a cluster fuck if the government does not change tack. Especially dealing with severely disabled children.
I have wrote to my Conservative MP for York outer Julian Sturdy. Hope he takes note.
Is the system reformable with a few billion increase in budgeting ? (Which is perhaps going to be part of the Budget.)
I would have thought so Nigel. I am no computer expert .But surely DWP could migrate the information ? Without the requirement to re,-apply. Especially if the circumstances have not changed for many years.
It is particularly cruel, as if you make any mistake on the form which invalidate the application, and have to reapply, you lose all transitional relief. Which is apparently around one in five applicants.
I think the OP is an excellent summary of the issues, and shows how utterly reckless May is being in trying to push through a deal in conflict with her red lines and her promises regarding NI.
I don't have complete faith in the ERG to hold the line, but one thing is clear. If May gets her deal through, Brexit will never meaningfully occur. So if I were a Tory backbencher I would roll the dice even if it led to an election by mistake. At the end of the day, if this happens May could never be the leader in that election. The delay caused by an election, and the likely inconclusive outcome could well produce no deal.
Leavers realise that their only real chance to achieve Brexit at this stage is to force no deal. May's deal will so obviously lead to a full reversal in due course that really she is leaving her opponents little choice but the nuclear option. This is what happens when people such as May are convinced that they have the right to overturn the result of the referendum result because in their view it is not in the national interest to proceed - and that is what this fight it now really about. The Elite v Democracy.
That is why people voted leave. They didn't want the elite stitching up deals with the EU that were not what they voted for. So leave voters are not going to change their minds just because remainers sell out to the EU like they always have. It is nothing to do with us.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out...
A fair point, though it is really for their political masters to be making such cases. It is a truly brilliant article - and is not unsparing about the faults of the EU (though most readers probably won’t get that far, particularly if they find his arguments unwelcome).
Boris Johnson has launched his latest assault on Theresa May’s Brexit negotiations, saying the Irish backstop deal would be the UK’s “greatest humiliation” since the Suez Crisis.
Boris Johnson has launched his latest assault on Theresa May’s Brexit negotiations, saying the Irish backstop deal would be the UK’s “greatest humiliation” since the Suez Crisis.
I feel sorry for Boris. Actually, I lie. I feel compassion in the sense that he's crossed the Rubicon a dozen times - in his head. He's the nearly man, the almost-ran, the might-have-been. As others have said, he's very like Churchill, only Randolph rather than Winston.
I think the OP is an excellent summary of the issues, and shows how utterly reckless May is being in trying to push through a deal in conflict with her red lines and her promises regarding NI.
I don't have complete faith in the ERG to hold the line, but one thing is clear. If May gets her deal through, Brexit will never meaningfully occur. So if I were a Tory backbencher I would roll the dice even if it led to an election by mistake. At the end of the day, if this happens May could never be the leader in that election. The delay caused by an election, and the likely inconclusive outcome could well produce no deal.
Leavers realise that their only real chance to achieve Brexit at this stage is to force no deal. May's deal will so obviously lead to a full reversal in due course that really she is leaving her opponents little choice but the nuclear option. This is what happens when people such as May are convinced that they have the right to overturn the result of the referendum result because in their view it is not in the national interest to proceed - and that is what this fight it now really about. The Elite v Democracy.
Nah, May isn't going for her deal because she wants to overturn democracy for the good of the country. She's doing it for the same reason she's done everything else since the 2017 election: to buy herself the next 24 hours in Number 10
That is why people voted leave. They didn't want the elite stitching up deals with the EU that were not what they voted for. So leave voters are not going to change their minds just because remainers sell out to the EU like they always have. It is nothing to do with us.
You appear to live in a fantasy world of ideological purity, unconnected with the real world. (Which is not a reference to Australia)
Boris Johnson has launched his latest assault on Theresa May’s Brexit negotiations, saying the Irish backstop deal would be the UK’s “greatest humiliation” since the Suez Crisis.
I feel sorry for Boris. Actually, I lie. I feel compassion in the sense that he's crossed the Rubicon a dozen times - in his head. He's the nearly man, the almost-ran, the might-have-been. As others have said, he's very like Churchill, only Randolph rather than Winston.
I think we're now way past the point at which any reasonable person might be interested in what he has to say: 'oh piss off, you lard-arsed buffoon' is surely now the default response to the latest offering. Interesting it's in the Standard: have we now reached the point at which only freesheets will accept his predictably outre ramblings.
Edit: Belfast Newsletter. Still not exactly a journalistic pinnacle.
They didn’t say bring down the government , they said vote against st the Budget
Of course all the commentators think this is the same thing (at least implicitly)
But it isn’t. I’d see a vote against the Budget. Then an intense period of negotiation in which they say “I told you we were serious”. Then there will be a new Budget (and quite possibly a new PM) but not a vote to bring down the government
But will the electorate accept another coronation of another Tory PM without a General Election? As for a new budget if the original falls, it would just confirm the perception of incompetence and ineptitude of the Government Executive. It is noticeable that the tories are losing the traditional media support, and if it goes....
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
Yes, I criticised it for negativity at the time.
The 1975 referendum was a lot more positive in its arguments, which is why Staying In won. Jezza benefited from positive campaigning in 2017. Politicians can often believe being negative about the opposition is sufficient, but voters seldom agree.
A negative campaign rarely works as any advertising man will tell you, that's why soap powder ads for example say 'washes whiter' not 'our product isn't perfect but!'
The remain campaign made a terrible mistake, why didn't they invite the likes of Junker and Tusk to come on TV and explain what the EU does for us and what it plans to do in the future etc. instead of leaving it all to our own widely disliked Politicians.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
Yes, I criticised it for negativity at the time.
The 1975 referendum was a lot more positive in its arguments, which is why Staying In won. Jezza benefited from positive campaigning in 2017. Politicians can often believe being negative about the opposition is sufficient, but voters seldom agree.
A negative campaign rarely works as any advertising man will tell you, that's why soap powder ads for example say 'washes whiter' not 'our product isn't perfect but!'
The remain campaign made a terrible mistake, why didn't they invite the likes of Junker and Tusk to come on TV and explain what the EU does for us and what it plans to do in the future etc. instead of leaving it all to our own widely disliked Politicians.
Are you being ironic with your last point? That wouldn’t have worked with the British electorate.
They didn’t say bring down the government , they said vote against st the Budget
Of course all the commentators think this is the same thing (at least implicitly)
But it isn’t. I’d see a vote against the Budget. Then an intense period of negotiation in which they say “I told you we were serious”. Then there will be a new Budget (and quite possibly a new PM) but not a vote to bring down the government
But will the electorate accept another coronation of another Tory PM without a General Election? As for a new budget if the original falls, it would just confirm the perception of incompetence and ineptitude of the Government Executive. It is noticeable that the tories are losing the traditional media support, and if it goes....
Why can’t the Tories see that the DUP won’t vote for a deal that forces them to align more with the RoI that with the rest of the U.K. They wouldn’t, no matter how much they dislike the thought of a Corbyn Gov. The Tories are causing their own downfall because there are no reasons to vote for them. Fear of Corbyn didn’t work in 2017 since when May has done nothing to show she is worth supporting and the Tories, and the ERG in particular, are too scared to move against her. It’s hard to see how Corbyn can be stopped even though he would be a catastrophe.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
Yes, I criticised it for negativity at the time.
The 1975 referendum was a lot more positive in its arguments, which is why Staying In won. Jezza benefited from positive campaigning in 2017. Politicians can often believe being negative about the opposition is sufficient, but voters seldom agree.
A negative campaign rarely works as any advertising man will tell you, that's why soap powder ads for example say 'washes whiter' not 'our product isn't perfect but!'
The remain campaign made a terrible mistake, why didn't they invite the likes of Junker and Tusk to come on TV and explain what the EU does for us and what it plans to do in the future etc. instead of leaving it all to our own widely disliked Politicians.
They didn’t say bring down the government , they said vote against st the Budget
Of course all the commentators think this is the same thing (at least implicitly)
But it isn’t. I’d see a vote against the Budget. Then an intense period of negotiation in which they say “I told you we were serious”. Then there will be a new Budget (and quite possibly a new PM) but not a vote to bring down the government
But will the electorate accept another coronation of another Tory PM without a General Election? As for a new budget if the original falls, it would just confirm the perception of incompetence and ineptitude of the Government Executive. It is noticeable that the tories are losing the traditional media support, and if it goes....
What, you mean like Labour called an election when Mccavity took over?
Like others, whilst I appreciate the read I do not agree with the conclusion.
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to screw things up again put things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.
The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
That's very true. It was also negative exactly according to the regular pattern of the bogus attacks on Labour's competence that get trotted out at every election - the ones that Justin and Uniondivide are effortlessly demolishing upthread. It is little wonder that a lot of habitual Labour voters voted against it.
Like others, whilst I appreciate the read I do not agree with the conclusion.
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to screw things up again put things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.
The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
The question is not whether the bet is more likely to come in than not; it is (or was) whether it would come in more than once in seven times.
Besides, if May falls to a Commons No Confidence vote, *how* do the Tories get another shot - bearing in mind that they only have two weeks to do it?
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
All true. I'd only add that we are equally in danger of taking the polls for granted in the opposite direction.
Labour's polling and Corbyn's personal polling are very different, the first is OK the second is disastrous. At the moment this doesn't matter. But in an election?
During an election campaign every party would have to explicitly commit to a Brexit position, something Labour have cleverly avoided til now. Once it became obvious to voters that Corbyn's Labour are pro-Brexit, and closer on this issue to Rees Mogg than Ken Clarke (even if the bulk of MPs and activists are passionately Remain) then millions of potential Labour voters might recoil.
The Tories could be returned with a healthy absolute majority.
Irony of ironies.
But that presumes every elector is as fascinated by Brexit as those on here. Some are, most aren't. My suspicion is that whoever banged on about anything other than Europe would gain votes. Wasn't 2017 the Brexit GE?
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
That's very true. It was also negative exactly according to the regular pattern of the bogus attacks on Labour's competence that get trotted out at every election - the ones that Justin and Uniondivide are effortlessly demolishing upthread. It is little wonder that a lot of habitual Labour voters voted against it.
Lol. ‘Effortlessly demolishing’ is a new synonym for ‘failing to accept the facts’ is it?
They didn’t say bring down the government , they said vote against st the Budget
Of course all the commentators think this is the same thing (at least implicitly)
But it isn’t. I’d see a vote against the Budget. Then an intense period of negotiation in which they say “I told you we were serious”. Then there will be a new Budget (and quite possibly a new PM) but not a vote to bring down the government
But will the electorate accept another coronation of another Tory PM without a General Election? As for a new budget if the original falls, it would just confirm the perception of incompetence and ineptitude of the Government Executive. It is noticeable that the tories are losing the traditional media support, and if it goes....
Over the past 60 odd years there have been six changes of PM without an immediate General Election MacMillan appointed 1957 next election 1959, Home 1963 (1964) Callaghan 1976 (1979) Major 1990 (1992) Brown 2007 (2010) and May 2016 (2017).
Whoever takes over probably won't ask the electorate for their immediate opinion either.
Like others, whilst I appreciate the read I do not agree with the conclusion.
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to screw things up again put things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.
The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
The question is not whether the bet is more likely to come in than not; it is (or was) whether it would come in more than once in seven times.
Besides, if May falls to a Commons No Confidence vote, *how* do the Tories get another shot - bearing in mind that they only have two weeks to do it?
There would have to be a coronation, either on a permanent or potentially temporary basis. A new government led by Javid would be given a chance to go back to the EU to see if they can find a deal more palatable to the Commons than the one May presented and (on this scenario) was rejected.
For me, unpleasant as it will be, I think that there is less than a 10% chance of the Commons rejecting May's deal. If it doesn't I think this debt is a loser.
I fear we might not be far away from a war engulfing the entire Middle East, nominally along Shia-Sunni lines. There are several major blocks vying for power, many of whom are using surrogates to further their aims. Added to this is the increased instability in this area, which is barely stable at the best of times.
If that is the case, then the question becomes how long it is before Israel gets dragged into it ...
This is another case where I hope I'm wrong ...
Israel never get 'dragged in' they choose to further their interests by becoming involved. Lebanon being the most egregious example in recent times.
I'm fine with criticising Israel, what I don't get is people being so much MORE animated by Israeli malfeasance than any other country/government.
For the same reason the Dutch were more harsh on the South Aficans than other Europeans. Israel are considered the only 'Western Country' in the region and those are the standards they are rightly being judged by.
Like others, whilst I appreciate the read I do not agree with the conclusion.
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to screw things up again put things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.
The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
The question is not whether the bet is more likely to come in than not; it is (or was) whether it would come in more than once in seven times.
Besides, if May falls to a Commons No Confidence vote, *how* do the Tories get another shot - bearing in mind that they only have two weeks to do it?
There would have to be a coronation, either on a permanent or potentially temporary basis. A new government led by Javid would be given a chance to go back to the EU to see if they can find a deal more palatable to the Commons than the one May presented and (on this scenario) was rejected.
For me, unpleasant as it will be, I think that there is less than a 10% chance of the Commons rejecting May's deal. If it doesn't I think this debt is a loser.
Yes, as you say, there'd need to be a coronation. Question is: would the entire parliamentary Conservative Party have the self-discipline to achieve that? Under current rules, it only takes two MPs to propose and second a candidate.
Like others, whilst I appreciate the read I do not agree with the conclusion.
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to screw things up again put things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.
The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
The question is not whether the bet is more likely to come in than not; it is (or was) whether it would come in more than once in seven times.
Besides, if May falls to a Commons No Confidence vote, *how* do the Tories get another shot - bearing in mind that they only have two weeks to do it?
There would have to be a coronation, either on a permanent or potentially temporary basis. A new government led by Javid would be given a chance to go back to the EU to see if they can find a deal more palatable to the Commons than the one May presented and (on this scenario) was rejected.
For me, unpleasant as it will be, I think that there is less than a 10% chance of the Commons rejecting May's deal. If it doesn't I think this debt is a loser.
Yes, as you say, there'd need to be a coronation. Question is: would the entire parliamentary Conservative Party have the self-discipline to achieve that? Under current rules, it only takes two MPs to propose and second a candidate.
So essentially, the 1922 committee have to accept Boris unopposed or hold a contest.
There is also technically the Leadsome option. Hold the contest, but have runner up drop out before the members vote. That might be necessary to squeeze out Boris.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What ieen such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is orbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
All true. I'd only add that we are equally in danger of taking the polls for granted in the opposite direction.
Labour's polling and Corbyn's personal polling are very different, the first is OK the second is disastrous. At the moment this doesn't matter. But in an election?
During an election campaign every party would have to explicitly commit to a Brexit position, something Labour have cleverly avoided til now. Once it became obvious to voters that Corbyn's Labour are pro-Brexit, and closer on this issue to Rees Mogg than Ken Clarke (even if the bulk of MPs and activists are passionately Remain) then millions of potential Labour voters might recoil.
The Tories could be returned with a healthy absolute majority.
Irony of ironies.
But that presumes every elector is as fascinated by Brexit as those on here. Some are, most aren't. My suspicion is that whoever banged on about anything other than Europe would gain votes. Wasn't 2017 the Brexit GE?
Polls show that, by a massive margin, Brexit is seen as THE most important issue facing the nation right now. In the last poll 65% put Brexit as Most Important Issue, the nearest challenger was Health, cited by 39%. That's huge.
@SeanT Apologies, cba mauling with block quote on my iPad. This is true, but on Brexit, the numbers even themselves out. When immigration appears as an issue, it means people think it is too high. Same for unemployment. When 63% think Brexit is most important, that means c30% think it isn't happening fast or hard enough, and c30% who think it is frankly insane. However, that said, your analysis is as spot on as anyone else's right now. TBH, almost anything could happen from here on in. Especially if we do get a GE.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
That's very true. It was also negative exactly according to the regular pattern of the bogus attacks on Labour's competence that get trotted out at every election - the ones that Justin and Uniondivide are effortlessly demolishing upthread. It is little wonder that a lot of habitual Labour voters voted against it.
Lol. ‘Effortlessly demolishing’ is a new synonym for ‘failing to accept the facts’ is it?
I was interested in the facts, so I set a few criteria for economic performance and then ran the numbers on the stats since 1945. The Tories did slightly worse overall - but largely because the Thatcher years were so bad. I took them out and there was no statistical difference. So the facts are that governments are much of a muchness with the exception of Thatcher's, which was much worse than the rest.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
That's very true. It was also negative exactly according to the regular pattern of the bogus attacks on Labour's competence that get trotted out at every election - the ones that Justin and Uniondivide are effortlessly demolishing upthread. It is little wonder that a lot of habitual Labour voters voted against it.
Lol. ‘Effortlessly demolishing’ is a new synonym for ‘failing to accept the facts’ is it?
I was interested in the facts, so I set a few criteria for economic performance and then ran the numbers on the stats since 1945. The Tories did slightly worse overall - but largely because the Thatcher years were so bad. I took them out and there was no statistical difference. So the facts are that governments are much of a muchness with the exception of Thatcher's, which was much worse than the rest.
Sorry to be the one to break it to you.
The comment I made, that Justin wibbled about but was unable to disprove (because it is fact) is that every Labour government has left more unemployment than when it took office.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and rties may not be a safe one to make.
All true. I'd only add that we are equally in danger of taking the polls for granted in the opposite direction.
Labour's polling and Corbyn's personal polling are very different, the first is OK the second is disastrous. At the moment this doesn't matter. But in an election?
During an election campaign every party would have to explicitly commit to a Brexit position, something Labour have cleverly avoided til now. Once it became obvious to voters that Corbyn's Labour are pro-Brexit, and closer on this issue to Rees Mogg than Ken Clarke (even if the bulk of MPs and activists are passionately Remain) then millions of potential Labour voters might recoil.
The Tories could be returned with a healthy absolute majority.
Irony of ironies.
But that presumes every elector is as fascinated by Brexit as those on here. Some are, most aren't. My suspicion is that whoever banged on about anything other than Europe would gain votes. Wasn't 2017 the Brexit GE?
They won't be if we get a transition period and Withdrawal Agreement and move towards a FTA.
If we move towards No Deal, an economic collapse and a possible break up of the Union Brexit will dominate not just the next general election but divide the country in a way it has not been since the Civil War
Why can’t the Tories see that the DUP won’t vote for a deal that forces them to align more with the RoI that with the rest of the U.K. They wouldn’t, no matter how much they dislike the thought of a Corbyn Gov. The Tories are causing their own downfall because there are no reasons to vote for them. Fear of Corbyn didn’t work in 2017 since when May has done nothing to show she is worth supporting and the Tories, and the ERG in particular, are too scared to move against her. It’s hard to see how Corbyn can be stopped even though he would be a catastrophe.
On current polls though the Tories will still be largest party and have a majority in England.
Corbyn will be reliant on SNP MPs on confidence and supply and LD MPs to get any legislation through
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class nst European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
Corbyn was at least ironically slightly honest when he said that it could do better on a few things.
How about a campaign that said free movement restrictions exist but our lazy use,was government haven’t the wit to change the benefits and tax system to stop us distracting disproportionate numbers, that we don’t track them when they are here and we are perfectly free to boot out the freeloaders if we wish to. How about listing some of the things that have happened in the Eu because of us, and things that have happened in the uk because of the EU. How the Eu has been very slow at negotiating trade agreements in the past but now has agreed six new one over the last few years. Each one we would need to negotiate from a fresh by ourselves.
It’s not perfect, we pay in too much for what we get back but it’s stil, in our interests to stay in.
It was Blair who refused to use the transition control restrictions on free movement from the new accession countries in 2004
I think the OP is an excellent summary of the issues, and shows how utterly reckless May is being in trying to push through a deal in conflict with her red lines and her promises regarding NI.
I don't have complete faith in the ERG to hold the line, but one thing is clear. If May gets her deal through, Brexit will never meaningfully occur. So if I were a Tory backbencher I would roll the dice even if it led to an election by mistake. At the end of the day, if this happens May could never be the leader in that election. The delay caused by an election, and the likely inconclusive outcome could well produce no deal.
Leavers realise that their only real chance to achieve Brexit at this stage is to force no deal. May's deal will so obviously lead to a full reversal in due course that really she is leaving her opponents little choice but the nuclear option. This is what happens when people such as May are convinced that they have the right to overturn the result of the referendum result because in their view it is not in the national interest to proceed - and that is what this fight it now really about. The Elite v Democracy.
The opposite actually, No Deal is the likeliest route to a reversal of Brexit with an EUref2 held before the Brexit exit date in March 2019 which Remain wins
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
That's very true. It was also negative exactly according to the regular pattern of the bogus attacks on Labour's competence that get trotted out at every election - the ones that Justin and Uniondivide are effortlessly demolishing upthread. It is little wonder that a lot of habitual Labour voters voted against it.
Lol. ‘Effortlessly demolishing’ is a new synonym for ‘failing to accept the facts’ is it?
I was interested in the facts, so I set a few criteria for economic performance and then ran the numbers on the stats since 1945. The Tories did slightly worse overall - but largely because the Thatcher years were so bad. I took them out and there was no statistical difference. So the facts are that governments are much of a muchness with the exception of Thatcher's, which was much worse than the rest.
Sorry to be the one to break it to you.
I think this is broadly correct. The post-war UK economy has (past decade excepted, which is why we have a problem) grown by about 25-30% per decade, pretty much irrespective of HMG's antics. That's not to say that government isn't important, it clearly is. Just that the country pretty much gets on with life through thick and thin.
On a personal level, I have fond memories of the 60s and 70s, when life was considerably harder, and the economy was a basket case. People are adaptable.
I fear we might not be far away from a war engulfing the entire Middle East, nominally along Shia-Sunni lines. There are several major blocks vying for power, many of whom are using surrogates to further their aims. Added to this is the increased instability in this area, which is barely stable at the best of times.
If that is the case, then the question becomes how long it is before Israel gets dragged into it ...
This is another case where I hope I'm wrong ...
Israel never get 'dragged in' they choose to further their interests by becoming involved. Lebanon being the most egregious example in recent times.
I'm fine with criticising Israel, what I don't get is people being so much MORE animated by Israeli malfeasance than any other country/government.
For the same reason the Dutch were more harsh on the South Aficans than other Europeans. Israel are considered the only 'Western Country' in the region and those are the standards they are rightly being judged by.
So people should be judged on the basis of whether they are western?
Sorry I meant to write 'Western Democracy' but was sidetracked by a Somali lady well known for her crusade against FGM. Her's is a very interesting story (on in cinemas near you starting February) but a very good illustration why you can't judge Western Democracies in the same way you can 'a girl from Mogadishu'
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
That's very true. It was also negative exactly according to the regular pattern of the bogus attacks on Labour's competence that get trotted out at every election - the ones that Justin and Uniondivide are effortlessly demolishing upthread. It is little wonder that a lot of habitual Labour voters voted against it.
Lol. ‘Effortlessly demolishing’ is a new synonym for ‘failing to accept the facts’ is it?
I was interested in the facts, so I set a few criteria for economic performance and then ran the numbers on the stats since 1945. The Tories did slightly worse overall - but largely because the Thatcher years were so bad. I took them out and there was no statistical difference. So the facts are that governments are much of a muchness with the exception of Thatcher's, which was much worse than the rest.
Sorry to be the one to break it to you.
At the end of the Thatcher years inflation and strikes were lower than 1979 and GDP per capita was higher. She did less well on unemployment admittedly and Major did even better on cutting inflation
A bit of an exaggeration, in one of the seats mentioned Darlington, 2 out of 3 candidates withdrew as they had been picked to stand for seats elsewhere. So the issue is not all down to 'disilussion with May's leadership' as the article suggests
I fear we might not be far away from a war engulfing the entire Middle East, nominally along Shia-Sunni lines. There are several major blocks vying for power, many of whom are using surrogates to further their aims. Added to this is the increased instability in this area, which is barely stable at the best of times.
If that is the case, then the question becomes how long it is before Israel gets dragged into it ...
This is another case where I hope I'm wrong ...
Israel never get 'dragged in' they choose to further their interests by becoming involved. Lebanon being the most egregious example in recent times.
I'm fine with criticising Israel, what I don't get is people being so much MORE animated by Israeli malfeasance than any other country/government.
For the same reason the Dutch were more harsh on the South Aficans than other Europeans. Israel are considered the only 'Western Country' in the region and those are the standards they are rightly being judged by.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What ieen such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is orbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
All true. I'd only add that we are equally in danger of taking the polls for granted in the opposite direction.
Labour's polling and Corbyn's personal polling are very different, the first is OK the second is disastrous. At the moment this doesn't matter. But in an election?
During an election campaign every party would have to explicitly commit to a Brexit position, something Labour have cleverly avoided til now. Once it became obvious to voters that Corbyn's Labour are pro-Brexit, and closer on this issue to Rees Mogg than Ken Clarke (even if the bulk of MPs and activists are passionately Remain) then millions of potential Labour voters might recoil.
The Tories could be returned with a healthy absolute majority.
Irony of ironies.
But that presumes every elector is as fascinated by Brexit as those on here. Some are, most aren't. My suspicion is that whoever banged on about anything other than Europe would gain votes. Wasn't 2017 the Brexit GE?
Polls show that, by a massive margin, Brexit is seen as THE most important issue facing the nation right now. In the last poll 65% put Brexit as Most Important Issue, the nearest challenger was Health, cited by 39%. That's huge.
@SeanT Apologies, cba mauling with block quote on my iPad. This is true, but on Brexit, the numbers even themselves out. When immigration appears as an issue, it means people think it is too high. Same for unemployment. When 63% think Brexit is most important, that means c30% think it isn't happening fast or hard enough, and c30% who think it is frankly insane. However, that said, your analysis is as spot on as anyone else's right now. TBH, almost anything could happen from here on in. Especially if we do get a GE.
That still means 63% of the country IS focused heavily on Brexit, pro or anti. It is THE issue of our age, the likes of which we have not seen in decades. So it would totally dominate any election and all parties would have to come up with a coherent position and plan (a good thing) and Labour's huge split would be finally revealed, as would the Leaver instincts of its leader.
So it is quite possible that, even when faced with the hapless TMay and the divided Tories, Labour could do a lot worse than they did in 2017, as Remainers shy away from Brexit Jez.
TMay would then be returned with a decent majority, having shown herself to be completely inept, at both governing and campaigning. It would be a fitting historical irony in this weirdest of eras.
Anyhow, as I say below, I agree with OGH and I think if TMay falls, or we lurch to no deal, then a 2nd referendum is more likely than a GE.
And now i must work, to make as much money as possible before we become communist.
At the moment the most likely outcome of a general election is that the Tories win a majority in England but Corbyn becomes PM anyway thanks to Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs
Why can’t the Tories see that the DUP won’t vote for a deal that forces them to align more with the RoI that with the rest of the U.K. They wouldn’t, no matter how much they dislike the thought of a Corbyn Gov. The Tories are causing their own downfall because there are no reasons to vote for them. Fear of Corbyn didn’t work in 2017 since when May has done nothing to show she is worth supporting and the Tories, and the ERG in particular, are too scared to move against her. It’s hard to see how Corbyn can be stopped even though he would be a catastrophe.
On current polls though the Tories will still be largest party and have a majority in England.
Corbyn will be reliant on SNP MPs on confidence and supply and LD MPs to get any legislation through
If we get a general election, it will be because May has royally fucked up delivering Brexit - and I really doubt anything like current polling would apply then.
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What ieen such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is orbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
All true. I'd only add that we are equally in danger of taking the polls for granted in the opposite direction.
Labour's polling and Corbyn's personal polling are very different, the first is OK the second is disastrous. At the moment this doesn't matter. But in an election?
During an election campaign every party would have to explicitly commit to a Brexit position, something Labour have cleverly avoided til now. Once it became obvious to voters that Corbyn's Labour are pro-Brexit, and closer on this issue to Rees Mogg than Ken Clarke (even if the bulk of MPs and activists are passionately Remain) then millions of potential Labour voters might recoil.
The Tories could be returned with a healthy absolute majority.
Irony of ironies.
But that presumes every elector is as fascinated by Brexit as those on here. Some are, most aren't. My suspicion is that whoever banged on about anything other than Europe would gain votes. Wasn't 2017 the Brexit GE?
Polls show that, by a massive margin, Brexit is seen as THE most important issue facing the nation right now. In the last poll 65% put Brexit as Most Important Issue, the nearest challenger was Health, cited by 39%. That's huge.
So, yes, if we get a GE any time soon it will be another Brexit election, indeed much more Brexity than the last, as we approach the Brexit Endtimes.
I think there's more likely to be a second referendum than an early general election.
I agree.
Difficult to see either before Brexit day, would they agree to postpone it?
The opportunity for a GE on Nov 29th is fast disappearing, they won't have one in Dec, Jan or early Feb because of the festive season, there's a small possibility of Feb 21st, 28th or March 7th or 14th.
Getting another referendum in that time would be even harder, would need an Act of Parliament first, then time to set the rules and for fundraising, campaigning etc.
The government would have to start the ball rolling literally next week.
They didn’t say bring down the government , they said vote against st the Budget
Of course all the commentators think this is the same thing (at least implicitly)
But it isn’t. I’d see a vote against the Budget. Then an intense period of negotiation in which they say “I told you we were serious”. Then there will be a new Budget (and quite possibly a new PM) but not a vote to bring down the government
But will the electorate accept another coronation of another Tory PM without a General Election? As for a new budget if the original falls, it would just confirm the perception of incompetence and ineptitude of the Government Executive. It is noticeable that the tories are losing the traditional media support, and if it goes....
Why can’t the Tories see that the DUP won’t vote for a deal that forces them to align more with the RoI that with the rest of the U.K. They wouldn’t, no matter how much they dislike the thought of a Corbyn Gov. The Tories are causing their own downfall because there are no reasons to vote for them. Fear of Corbyn didn’t work in 2017 since when May has done nothing to show she is worth supporting and the Tories, and the ERG in particular, are too scared to move against her. It’s hard to see how Corbyn can be stopped even though he would be a catastrophe.
On current polls though the Tories will still be largest party and have a majority in England.
Corbyn will be reliant on SNP MPs on confidence and supply and LD MPs to get any legislation through
If we get a general election, it will be because May has royally fucked up delivering Brexit - and I really doubt anything like current polling would apply then.
Oh absolutely it will apply, if we get a GE it will be as Labour MPs have voted with the ERG against May's Deal.
The Tory anti Corbyn vote in England is rock solid, even after Chequers and May's moves towards compromise with the EU on a temporary Customs Union all the polling confirms the Tories would get a clear majority in England and that confirms my own experience on the doorstep.
It is Scottish SNP and Welsh Labour MPs who will get Corbyn to Number 10. Do not forget the Tories had an overall majority of 29 in England at GE17 but were 8 short of an overrall majority across the UK
I have finished reading that Ivan Rogers lecture, which is brutal on the delusions of those trying to implement Brexit.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
The Remain campaign was almost entirely negative, sadly.
That's very true. It was also negative exactly according to the regular pattern of the bogus attacks on Labour's competence that get trotted out at every election - the ones that Justin and Uniondivide are effortlessly demolishing upthread. It is little wonder that a lot of habitual Labour voters voted against it.
@justin124 didn’t demolish the argument he stated half the case - those bits that were favourable to him
Spending was too high because Brown believed that the tax revenues from the City were sustainable while most people knew it was a bubble
And when the taxes fell away there was a big deficit (which is what Justin highlighted).
But the size of the structural deficit is what highlights Browns failure
Why can’t the Tories see that the DUP won’t vote for a deal that forces them to align more with the RoI that with the rest of the U.K. They wouldn’t, no matter how much they dislike the thought of a Corbyn Gov. The Tories are causing their own downfall because there are no reasons to vote for them. Fear of Corbyn didn’t work in 2017 since when May has done nothing to show she is worth supporting and the Tories, and the ERG in particular, are too scared to move against her. It’s hard to see how Corbyn can be stopped even though he would be a catastrophe.
On current polls though the Tories will still be largest party and have a majority in England.
Corbyn will be reliant on SNP MPs on confidence and supply and LD MPs to get any legislation through
If we get a general election, it will be because May has royally fucked up delivering Brexit - and I really doubt anything like current polling would apply then.
Oh absolutely it will apply, if we get a GE it will be as Labour MPs have voted with the ERG against May's Deal.
The Tory anti Corbyn vote in England is rock solid, even after Chequers and May's moves towards compromise with the EU on a temporary Customs Union all the polling confirms the Tories would get a clear majority in England and that confirms my own experience on the doorstep.
It is Scottish SNP and Welsh Labour MPs who will get Corbyn to Number 10. Do not forget the Tories had an overall majority of 29 in England at GE17 but were 8 short of an overrall majority across the UK
Actually the Tories had a majority of 58 in England at GE17
I fear we might not be far away from a war engulfing the entire Middle East, nominally along Shia-Sunni lines. There are several major blocks vying for power, many of whom are using surrogates to further their aims. Added to this is the increased instability in this area, which is barely stable at the best of times.
If that is the case, then the question becomes how long it is before Israel gets dragged into it ...
This is another case where I hope I'm wrong ...
Israel never get 'dragged in' they choose to further their interests by becoming involved. Lebanon being the most egregious example in recent times.
I'm fine with criticising Israel, what I don't get is people being so much MORE animated by Israeli malfeasance than any other country/government.
For the same reason the Dutch were more harsh on the South Aficans than other Europeans. Israel are considered the only 'Western Country' in the region and those are the standards they are rightly being judged by.
"rightly"
Dear fucking god
Capital 'G'.
Only if you've signed up for monotheism....
While on the subject of pedantry (yours and mine) I read a short story by an American writer Adam Haslett yesterday and one of his stories involved an English couple. It began 'We met on the sidewalk off Oxford Street....." There are many Americanisms that you can get away with but 'sidewalk' isn't one of them. From that point on the story just didn't involve an English couple.
All true. I'd only add that we are equally in danger of taking the polls for granted in the opposite direction.
Labour's polling and Corbyn's personal polling are very different, the first is OK the second is disastrous. At the moment this doesn't matter. But in an election?
During an election campaign every party would have to explicitly commit to a Brexit position, something Labour have cleverly avoided til now. Once it became obvious to voters that Corbyn's Labour are pro-Brexit, and closer on this issue to Rees Mogg than Ken Clarke (even if the bulk of MPs and activists are passionately Remain) then millions of potential Labour voters might recoil.
The Tories could be returned with a healthy absolute majority.
Irony of ironies.
But that presumes every elector is as fascinated by Brexit as those on here. Some are, most aren't. My suspicion is that whoever banged on about anything other than Europe would gain votes. Wasn't 2017 the Brexit GE?
Polls show that, by a massive margin, Brexit is seen as THE most important issue facing the nation right now. In the last poll 65% put Brexit as Most Important Issue, the nearest challenger was Health, cited by 39%. That's huge.
So, yes, if we get a GE any time soon it will be another Brexit election, indeed much more Brexity than the last, as we approach the Brexit Endtimes.
I think there's more likely to be a second referendum than an early general election.
I agree.
Difficult to see either before Brexit day, would they agree to postpone it?
The opportunity for a GE on Nov 29th is fast disappearing, they won't have one in Dec, Jan or early Feb because of the festive season, there's a small possibility of Feb 21st, 28th or March 7th or 14th.
Getting another referendum in that time would be even harder, would need an Act of Parliament first, then time to set the rules and for fundraising, campaigning etc.
The government would have to start the ball rolling literally next week.
Under the FTPA, the election follows automatically from a VoNC. If that vote is in mid-December, say (following the EU summit), then the 2 weeks' government-forming process would cross Christmas and if one couldn't be formed, the election would be be held in late January. There is very little discretion in the matter.
I think a new PM would ask for an extension to A50
BoZo already said he would
If Boris became PM the EU leaders might refuse an extension reckoning that the chance to get rid of 'those troublemakers' is a price worth paying.
It only needs Orban to say "sod off" for any extension to Article 50 to fail. Maybe somebody in the ERG has a back-channel.....a thank you for that Tory MEP support?
Like others, whilst I appreciate the read I do not agree with the conclusion.
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to screw things up again put things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.
The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
The question is not whether the bet is more likely to come in than not; it is (or was) whether it would come in more than once in seven times.
Besides, if May falls to a Commons No Confidence vote, *how* do the Tories get another shot - bearing in mind that they only have two weeks to do it?
There would have to be a coronation, either on a permanent or potentially temporary basis. A new government led by Javid would be given a chance to go back to the EU to see if they can find a deal more palatable to the Commons than the one May presented and (on this scenario) was rejected.
For me, unpleasant as it will be, I think that there is less than a 10% chance of the Commons rejecting May's deal. If it doesn't I think this debt is a loser.
Yes, as you say, there'd need to be a coronation. Question is: would the entire parliamentary Conservative Party have the self-discipline to achieve that? Under current rules, it only takes two MPs to propose and second a candidate.
24 hours to change the rules (party board) 24 hours for nominations Hustings 24 hours after that. Current voting system but with 1 hour between rounds and each round open for 1 hour
I fear we might not be far away from a war engulfing the entire Middle East, nominally along Shia-Sunni lines. There are several major blocks vying for power, many of whom are using surrogates to further their aims. Added to this is the increased instability in this area, which is barely stable at the best of times.
If that is the case, then the question becomes how long it is before Israel gets dragged into it ...
This is another case where I hope I'm wrong ...
Israel never get 'dragged in' they choose to further their interests by becoming involved. Lebanon being the most egregious example in recent times.
I'm fine with criticising Israel, what I don't get is people being so much MORE animated by Israeli malfeasance than any other country/government.
For the same reason the Dutch were more harsh on the South Aficans than other Europeans. Israel are considered the only 'Western Country' in the region and those are the standards they are rightly being judged by.
"rightly"
Dear fucking god
Capital 'G'.
Only if you've signed up for monotheism....
While on the subject of pedantry (yours and mine) I read a short story by an American writer Adam Haslett yesterday and one of his stories involved an English couple. It began 'We met on the sidewalk off Oxford Street....." There are many Americanisms that you can get away with but 'sidewalk' isn't one of them. From that point on the story just didn't involve an English couple.
Very solipsistic Roger I don’t doubt that for Americans it was all about an English couple.
Just sitting here dozing in front of the fire, reading on here the pros and cons of Brexit I must say that the concept of a second referendum is far more advanced than I thought likely. Although Lisa Nandy on the radio this late morning was convincing as to why there shouldn’t be one.
My view: deal then no GE or second referendum. GE in 2022 as planned.
I fear we might not be far away from a war engulfing the entire Middle East, nominally along Shia-Sunni lines. There are several major blocks vying for power, many of whom are using surrogates to further their aims. Added to this is the increased instability in this area, which is barely stable at the best of times.
If that is the case, then the question becomes how long it is before Israel gets dragged into it ...
This is another case where I hope I'm wrong ...
Israel never get 'dragged in' they choose to further their interests by becoming involved. Lebanon being the most egregious example in recent times.
I'm fine with criticising Israel, what I don't get is people being so much MORE animated by Israeli malfeasance than any other country/government.
For the same reason the Dutch were more harsh on the South Aficans than other Europeans. Israel are considered the only 'Western Country' in the region and those are the standards they are rightly being judged by.
"rightly"
Dear fucking god
Capital 'G'.
Only if you've signed up for monotheism....
While on the subject of pedantry (yours and mine) I read a short story by an American writer Adam Haslett yesterday and one of his stories involved an English couple. It began 'We met on the sidewalk off Oxford Street....." There are many Americanisms that you can get away with but 'sidewalk' isn't one of them. From that point on the story just didn't involve an English couple.
Very solipsistic Roger I don’t doubt that for Americans it was all about an English couple.
Just sitting here dozing in front of the fire, reading on here the pros and cons of Brexit I must say that the concept of a second referendum is far more advanced than I thought likely. Although Lisa Nandy on the radio this late morning was convincing as to why there shouldn’t be one.
My view: deal then no GE or second referendum. GE in 2022 as planned.
OK, but does that mean that the whole UK stays in either/both SM/CU? Or do you think the DUP are bluffing?
I think a new PM would ask for an extension to A50
BoZo already said he would
If Boris became PM the EU leaders might refuse an extension reckoning that the chance to get rid of 'those troublemakers' is a price worth paying.
The EU wants the UK to Remain. Some Eurocrats might say otherwise, but the overwhelming desire is for the UK to change its mind. They don't want the economic damage of No Deal any more than us, and of course the UK returning to the fold would strengthen the EU, and the failure of Brexit would be an historic example to others not to even try to copy us.
But can you imagine the shit that Juncker and his Eurocrats would force-feed into the UK, if we grovelled back in the EU after failling to get a deal?
Not to mention the shit-filled intravenous drip the voters would stick in the arm of the current crop of Westminster politicians.....
Like others, whilst I appreciate the read I do not agree with the conclusion.
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to screw things up again put things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.
The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
The question is not whether the bet is more likely to come in than not; it is (or was) whether it would come in more than once in seven times.
Besides, if May falls to a Commons No Confidence vote, *how* do the Tories get another shot - bearing in mind that they only have two weeks to do it?
There would have to be a coronation, either on a permanent or potentially temporary basis. A new government led by Javid would be given a chance to go back to the EU to see if they can find a deal more palatable to the Commons than the one May presented and (on this scenario) was rejected.
For me, unpleasant as it will be, I think that there is less than a 10% chance of the Commons rejecting May's deal. If it doesn't I think this debt is a loser.
Yes, as you say, there'd need to be a coronation. Question is: would the entire parliamentary Conservative Party have the self-discipline to achieve that? Under current rules, it only takes two MPs to propose and second a candidate.
24 hours to change the rules (party board) 24 hours for nominations Hustings 24 hours after that. Current voting system but with 1 hour between rounds and each round open for 1 hour
Comments
Paying in advance would leave too long a period without getting paid when entering work and would be a disincentive to move into work.
Whilst I'm OK with MPs rebelling on certain policy issues (personally I'd even be alright with them rebelling to support a reasonable Brexit deal, though many other Labour MPs definitely wouldn't be), any MP who tried to prevent an election coming about / prevent Corbyn becoming PM would 100% be deselected.
No wonder PB Tories sound like stroppy children this morning.
The economy was only growing because of the huge dollars of fiscal stimulus. Which were only ever supposed to be temporary.
You’re using one example that doesn’t even disprove my argument.
Labour isn’t working; it never does.
What it highlights for me though is the utter failure of the political, administrative and commercial class and, indeed, of the EU itself to make real to voters in the UK the benefits of being in the EU. It is very curious how a country which became successful during its period in the EU - and part of that success will have been as a result of being a member - has progressively become more Eurosceptic over the years rather than less. Not all of this can be put down to silly newspaper articles or even recent issues with backhanded policies on migration and the rest. Other countries have had parties with a Eurosceptic tinge and other countries have voted against European measures (France, Netherlands) but amongst very few of them has there been such a consistently strong anti-EU feeling despite the benefits of the EU.
Rogers is right in his analysis but it is perhaps a pity that he and his fellow intelligent civil servants did not apply their minds more forcefully to how the case for the EU needed to be made, day in, day out, and seek to persuade politicians of this. So much was taken for granted. As we are now going to find out.
On a distantly related note, I think we are in danger of taking the current polls for granted. If there is no deal or one is voted down and we end up in GE territory, I think it quite possible that Corbyn could get an absolute majority. People may just feel so fed up with having the agonies of a minority government having to argue with itself that they might just go: "Oh fuck it. Give him the chance. After all he can hardly do any worse." Not my sentiments but the assumption that Corbyn will only be able to exercise power courtesy of other smaller parties may not be a safe one to make.
How about many of the tax and benefits changes over the last decade have pushed people into the job market?
You say ‘supposedly record employment’. You doubt the figures?
Nevertheless. for those who can not work due to caring responsibilities looking after severely disabled children.
The facts will not change DWP hold all the information.So they should migrate the information across.
Surely the government can see that , and they would not want the bad publicity ot or a bad impact on such families.
This is what people are supposed to do , point out the problems.
I am no computer expert .But surely DWP could migrate the information ?
Without the requirement to re,-apply.
Especially if the circumstances have not changed for many years.
Unemployment 1997 - 2.1m
& that was after 18 years of fiddling & pushing the unemployed onto disability.
But, and there was a big but. There was a perception out there (which was entirely correct) that we put huge amounts of funds into the European Union and we get very little back. And now we have unlimited numbers of poor low skilled migrants from Eastern Europe who make little if any contribution to the country and we can do little about it
It seemed an unnecessarily expensive and complicated trade agreement. Which is all we ever wanted.
Yet the EU treated Cameron with disdain. Germnay’s fine. They’re a bigger net contributor than we are, but they essentially run the show. They are the England of the United Kingdom. We are and always have been even when much poorer the second largest net contributor. In our entire membership not once have we got more out than we put in. Yet we are treat like an embarrassing older uncle who doesn’t get the modern world.
Well, guess what we have.
I love the single market. I think the ECJ has done a great job of economically liberalising the continent and it has made us all richer because of it. The envormental regulations were imposed on us, against our will, but they have made our nation cleaner. Air and water as clean as it was around the industrial revolution. I like the knowledge, though I barely share it, or a club, a communitaire or similar nations with similar values. I tolerate the migration because of the benefits we get econicnally from the single market
I voted leave, and I would vote leave again.
Corbyn was at least ironically slightly honest when he said that it could do better on a few things.
How about a campaign that said free movement restrictions exist but our lazy use,was government haven’t the wit to change the benefits and tax system to stop us distracting disproportionate numbers, that we don’t track them when they are here and we are perfectly free to boot out the freeloaders if we wish to.
How about listing some of the things that have happened in the Eu because of us, and things that have happened in the uk because of the EU. How the Eu has been very slow at negotiating trade agreements in the past but now has agreed six new one over the last few years. Each one we would need to negotiate from a fresh by ourselves.
It’s not perfect, we pay in too much for what we get back but it’s stil, in our interests to stay in.
When introducing a new system I estimated costs/time as
One third systems analysis and programming
One third getting the historic data in the system corrected
One third implementing the system.
My guess is that the latter two items were under estimated for the Universal Credit system.
They didn’t say bring down the government , they said vote against st the Budget
Of course all the commentators think this is the same thing (at least implicitly)
But it isn’t. I’d see a vote against the Budget. Then an intense period of negotiation in which they say “I told you we were serious”. Then there will be a new Budget (and quite possibly a new PM) but not a vote to bring down the government
@notme:
The system has been revised over and over. I find it utterly extraordinary that people are now defending the original system. It created an awful trap for many people. UC is a bit of a holy grail. But the system it is replacing is unbelievable complicated.
@dixiedean:
No argument there. The previous system was Byzantine, with multiple benefits, some automatic, others means-tested, some taxable, others not. Some paid weekly, some fortnightly, others monthly.
The argument is about the efficiency of the roll out, and the generosity of the system.
People working on the system, those claiming, 30 Tory MPs, all agree there is a problem.
The 1975 referendum was a lot more positive in its arguments, which is why Staying In won. Jezza benefited from positive campaigning in 2017. Politicians can often believe being negative about the opposition is sufficient, but voters seldom agree.
And the other aspect is that they're going to be mindful of what their own voters think. If they nod through a Brexit deal which is seen to "endanger the Union" or be "a step towards a United Ireland", there's great political risks for the DUP - risks which they know all about, since the main reason they became the main unionist party was because the UUP was seen to have "betrayed unionists" with the Good Friday Agreement.
The Tories are delusional to think the DUP's bottom line is going to be that the Tories must be kept in office at any cost. While I'm sure they have no love at all for Corbyn, and would prefer a Tory government if all other things were equal, they are not going to let it take priority over their own main interests (protecting "the Union" as they see it, protecting their own electoral fortunes, and protecting their leverage in future negotiations at Westminster).
Which is apparently around one in five applicants.
I don't have complete faith in the ERG to hold the line, but one thing is clear. If May gets her deal through, Brexit will never meaningfully occur. So if I were a Tory backbencher I would roll the dice even if it led to an election by mistake. At the end of the day, if this happens May could never be the leader in that election. The delay caused by an election, and the likely inconclusive outcome could well produce no deal.
Leavers realise that their only real chance to achieve Brexit at this stage is to force no deal. May's deal will so obviously lead to a full reversal in due course that really she is leaving her opponents little choice but the nuclear option. This is what happens when people such as May are convinced that they have the right to overturn the result of the referendum result because in their view it is not in the national interest to proceed - and that is what this fight it now really about. The Elite v Democracy.
It is a truly brilliant article - and is not unsparing about the faults of the EU (though most readers probably won’t get that far, particularly if they find his arguments unwelcome).
It is notable just how far economic concerns can fall as salient issues for many voters...
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/12/politico-harvard-poll-health-838938
Boris Johnson has launched his latest assault on Theresa May’s Brexit negotiations, saying the Irish backstop deal would be the UK’s “greatest humiliation” since the Suez Crisis.
(Which is not a reference to Australia)
Edit: Belfast Newsletter. Still not exactly a journalistic pinnacle.
Bloody weird weather. Windy, but the wind's warm.
Anyway, early days but they reckon we might have rain in the US and more rain in Mexico.
The remain campaign made a terrible mistake, why didn't they invite the likes of Junker and Tusk to come on TV and explain what the EU does for us and what it plans to do in the future etc. instead of leaving it all to our own widely disliked Politicians.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-conservative-party-candidates-shortage-theresa-may-leadership-brexit-mps-a8582296.html
If May falls the Tories will still have at least one more chance to
screw things up againput things right before we get into election mode. That makes the bet a loser. This is where the delusions of Corbyn's PM by (last) Christmas hits reality. The reality is that the Conservatives are sufficiently close to a majority (after taking the SF non MPs and the Speaker out of the reckoning) to make any other government pretty much impossible for anything other than seeking to overcome the ridiculous FTPA and calling an election.The only way that Corbyn is next PM is if May ends up leading the Tories into an election again. That is looking less likely to me than it did a couple of months ago. Her coat is on an increasingly shoogly peg.
Besides, if May falls to a Commons No Confidence vote, *how* do the Tories get another shot - bearing in mind that they only have two weeks to do it?
Whoever takes over probably won't ask the electorate for their immediate opinion either.
For me, unpleasant as it will be, I think that there is less than a 10% chance of the Commons rejecting May's deal. If it doesn't I think this debt is a loser.
There is also technically the Leadsome option. Hold the contest, but have runner up drop out before the members vote. That might be necessary to squeeze out Boris.
Apologies, cba mauling with block quote on my iPad.
This is true, but on Brexit, the numbers even themselves out. When immigration appears as an issue, it means people think it is too high. Same for unemployment.
When 63% think Brexit is most important, that means c30% think it isn't happening fast or hard enough, and c30% who think it is frankly insane.
However, that said, your analysis is as spot on as anyone else's right now. TBH, almost anything could happen from here on in.
Especially if we do get a GE.
Sorry to be the one to break it to you.
Labour isn’t working. It never has.
If we move towards No Deal, an economic collapse and a possible break up of the Union Brexit will dominate not just the next general election but divide the country in a way it has not been since the Civil War
Corbyn will be reliant on SNP MPs on confidence and supply and LD MPs to get any legislation through
On a personal level, I have fond memories of the 60s and 70s, when life was considerably harder, and the economy was a basket case. People are adaptable.
The opportunity for a GE on Nov 29th is fast disappearing, they won't have one in Dec, Jan or early Feb because of the festive season, there's a small possibility of Feb 21st, 28th or March 7th or 14th.
Getting another referendum in that time would be even harder, would need an Act of Parliament first, then time to set the rules and for fundraising, campaigning etc.
The government would have to start the ball rolling literally next week.
On your second point I agree
The Tory anti Corbyn vote in England is rock solid, even after Chequers and May's moves towards compromise with the EU on a temporary Customs Union all the polling confirms the Tories would get a clear majority in England and that confirms my own experience on the doorstep.
It is Scottish SNP and Welsh Labour MPs who will get Corbyn to Number 10. Do not forget the Tories had an overall majority of 29 in England at GE17 but were 8 short of an overrall majority across the UK
Spending was too high because Brown believed that the tax revenues from the City were sustainable while most people knew it was a bubble
And when the taxes fell away there was a big deficit (which is what Justin highlighted).
But the size of the structural deficit is what highlights Browns failure
24 hours for nominations
Hustings 24 hours after that.
Current voting system but with 1 hour between rounds and each round open for 1 hour
Done inside a working week
Just sitting here dozing in front of the fire, reading on here the pros and cons of Brexit I must say that the concept of a second referendum is far more advanced than I thought likely. Although Lisa Nandy on the radio this late morning was convincing as to why there shouldn’t be one.
My view: deal then no GE or second referendum. GE in 2022 as planned.
Or do you think the DUP are bluffing?
Not to mention the shit-filled intravenous drip the voters would stick in the arm of the current crop of Westminster politicians.....
https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1051052322086940672?s=21