Not sure I think she has the luck to carry this poisoned chalice but I agree that nobody in the party would be able to see increasing personal ratings and poll leads. I think you would find outside the bubble her dancing queen was quite well received
My first observation is she, or rather her sense of duty, decided to take on the chalice in July 2016. She could have walked away but didn't and due to the ineptitude of her opponents (and that was perhaps a real sign of things to come) she found herself alone on the battlefield.
We all have our "bubbles" - in yours, the "dancing queen" was a well received sign of humanity whereas in mine, it was a cringing embarrassment up there with William Hague at Notting Hill Carnival.
I've asked this before and no one has ever answered, but why are people still fussing about a hard border in NI. It's always been fluid.
Who wants a hard border? The UK doesn't and Ireland don't. If the EU want a hard border, tell them to build it. Varadkar daren't build one - he'd be out of his ear. Fine Gael may be tribal but there are limits. So will the EU (who?) send in an army to build it?
Why doesn't May just call their bluff? It's nothing to do with us what the EU want anymore, we're leaving.
PB Groundhog Day wouldn't be complete without this argument getting trotted out...
Be fair - it gets discussed more on PB than by the Govt whose job it is to think about it. The Govt only seem to have realised it is there in the last few weeks.
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
on the other hand how does the EU guarantee its banking system ? if Italy is let go investors would lose faith in the Euro and then the dominoes line up Greece, Spain, Portugal France turmoil for the rEurozone
If a British PM came out and said. "We won't have a hard border in Ireland," what could the EU do?
How about … "If you don't build one, we'll be obstructive in discussions."
"Like now, you mean," would be the response. The original paper tiger.
It may be boring, but that's because the EU can't answer it
We would be in breach of our WTO obligations and subject to ruling from them. Or are you advoctaing that we simply disregard all the treaties we have signed over the years?
If a British PM came out and said. "We won't have a hard border in Ireland," what could the EU do?
How about … "If you don't build one, we'll be obstructive in discussions."
"Like now, you mean," would be the response. The original paper tiger.
It may be boring, but that's because the EU can't answer it
They'd say what they have said... "That's great. In order to avoid one you'll need to maintain full alignment with the single market and customs union."
If a British PM came out and said. "We won't have a hard border in Ireland," what could the EU do?
How about … "If you don't build one, we'll be obstructive in discussions."
"Like now, you mean," would be the response. The original paper tiger.
It may be boring, but that's because the EU can't answer it
We would be in breach of our WTO obligations and subject to ruling from them. Or are you advoctaing that we simply disregard all the treaties we have signed over the years?
"pull up the drawbridge and fuck the lot of 'em".
A fine route to poverty and civil insurrection. [ok, maybe that's a teensy-weensy bit hyperbolic]
If we no deal, can anyone make the U.K. implement a border?
We are a large economy, but we really need world trade to be rules based. It's not in our interests to start playing fast and loose with WTO rules, particularly given that our schedules have yet to be agreed.
It's uncomfortable for some, but one of the reasons the UK is so attractive to FDI is that we are law-abiding, consistent and fair. That's part of our brand and we trash that at our peril (of course, some Ultras believe that we've already done that by voting for Brexit).
Why is thought the police under estimate numbers? I can't see why they would be biased or are they just awful at it?
Why did they not give an estimate this time? Have they stopped doing so or was it just too big to give a sensible number?
Did they provide a number for the Iraq and Countryside march?
I imagine the police have to justify their overtime bill on most marches, and also build their experience for how many to have on hand for the next one. They are used to handling non-political crowds as well so I would imagine that they have a pretty good idea.
The one last Saturday must have foxed them because way more people turned up than anyone expected - there were nowhere near as many stewards as you'd expect and things like stickers and leaflets ran out really early. Had there been any trouble the boys in blue might have struggled because there really weren't many of them either compared to protesters. There were also large groups roaming around away from the advertised route.
I think the police simply gave up trying to count because it was so big.
The lack of police at the march was surprising. I did not see a single one and if there were stewards they were not obvious. I felt sorry for the passengers in cars and lorries stuck in Park Lane - the road should have been closed much earlier.
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
on the other hand how does the EU guarantee its banking system ? if Italy is let go investors would lose faith in the Euro and then the dominoes line up Greece, Spain, Portugal France turmoil for the rEurozone
The EU can guarantee its banking system by the ECB making clear it will make banks whole on interbank losses.
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
on the other hand how does the EU guarantee its banking system ? if Italy is let go investors would lose faith in the Euro and then the dominoes line up Greece, Spain, Portugal France turmoil for the rEurozone
The EU can guarantee its banking system by the ECB making clear it will make banks whole on interbank losses.
which is of course a confidence call, If the ECB just taken a huge hit on Target2 how confident would you be ?
Brexit will change the face of the European Union in many ways. For one, it will make it a lot whiter.
In a bloc that hasn’t placed much focus on increasing the political representation of minorities, the U.K. stands out. Its history of conversations about race relations is wholly different from most of Europe. It’s home to some of the most extensive anti-discrimination legislation and scholarly discussions around race. And it tracks and actively promotes minority leadership in politics and businesses through government-funded programs....
.....Of the 17 MEPs of an ethnic minority background, eight are from the U.K. Beyond the elected officials, the U.K. employs many of the assistants and advisers from minority backgrounds in the Parliament.
“After Brexit, in terms of fighting racism and discrimination, the EU is going to be worse off,” Alfiaz Vaiya, the coordinator of the Parliament’s anti-racism and diversity intergroup, said. “It’s losing a fundamental member state that, whether under Labour or Conservative governments, has advocated for anti-discrimination policy.”
*"People's Vote" is just dishonest. And prefixing it with a hash tag makes me embarrassed for the hash tagger
... as opposed to 'MPs Vote'?
How many "People's Vote" supporters would mind if Brexit was stopped without a second referendum?
May's latest soundbite of calling it a "politicians' vote" seems like a gift to the campaign since the a referendum can obviously be contrasted with the meaningful vote in parliament.
Of course we could choose not to become WTO members, and join an illustrious group of counties including Somalia, Eritrea and North Korea...
One area for wiggle room is that the WTO doesn't specify *how* this is done. Just that you can't discriminate. However, we only (currently, patience uniondivvie!) have one land border with Johnny Foreigner. There's an argument to made there. However, I have no idea what's going to happen and I'm not much interested in speculating, spoilsport that I am.
Why is thought the police under estimate numbers? I can't see why they would be biased or are they just awful at it?
Why did they not give an estimate this time? Have they stopped doing so or was it just too big to give a sensible number?
Did they provide a number for the Iraq and Countryside march?
I imagine the police have to justify their overtime bill on most marches, and also build their experience for how many to have on hand for the next one. They are used to handling non-political crowds as well so I would imagine that they have a pretty good idea.
The one last Saturday must have foxed them because way more people turned up than anyone expected - there were nowhere near as many stewards as you'd expect and things like stickers and leaflets ran out really early. Had there been any trouble the boys in blue might have struggled because there really weren't many of them either compared to protesters. There were also large groups roaming around away from the advertised route.
I think the police simply gave up trying to count because it was so big.
The lack of police at the march was surprising. I did not see a single one and if there were stewards they were not obvious. I felt sorry for the passengers in cars and lorries stuck in Park Lane - the road should have been closed much earlier.
There were a couple by the start line looking bemused, but very few otherwise. There were a few at the exit on Parliament square. Traffic was not stopped early enough, so some cars were stuck for ages. Not enough stewards either.
A very well behaved crowd though, no arrests and not even much litter. Little or no policing was needed, apart from stopping traffic.
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
on the other hand how does the EU guarantee its banking system ? if Italy is let go investors would lose faith in the Euro and then the dominoes line up Greece, Spain, Portugal France turmoil for the rEurozone
The EU can guarantee its banking system by the ECB making clear it will make banks whole on interbank losses.
which is of course a confidence call, If the ECB just taken a huge hit on Target2 how confident would you be ?
One of the Germany's largest banks is Hypovereinsbank, which is owned by Italy's Unicredit. I therefore would bet that the amount of howling about a bail out would be much more muted.
It is worth remembering that they could do this in a fairly smart manner: they would effectively enter into swap agreements with EU banks to eliminate currency risk. This means the total size of the subsidy would be in the €80-100bn range.
Simply: I don't see any circumstances where the ECB allows a preventable banking run.
How many "People's Vote" supporters would mind if Brexit was stopped without a second referendum?
Probably a similar proportion to the supporters of the Referendum Party/UKIP who would've been quite happy for Brexit to have happened sans referendum.
Both sides are pretty disingenuous and guilty of dressing up self-interest as 'democracy'. Democracy is brilliant when people agree with you...
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
on the other hand how does the EU guarantee its banking system ? if Italy is let go investors would lose faith in the Euro and then the dominoes line up Greece, Spain, Portugal France turmoil for the rEurozone
The EU can guarantee its banking system by the ECB making clear it will make banks whole on interbank losses.
which is of course a confidence call, If the ECB just taken a huge hit on Target2 how confident would you be ?
And when you say "taken a huge hit", what you mean is that the Italian government continues to owe the ECB money. That obligation to pay doesn't disappear with the departure of Italy from the Eurozone. It still has a legal obligation to make good those losses. The ECB could - if it wanted to - declare Italy to be in default and seize Italian assets abroad and prevent it from issuing new government debt.
I don't think that very likely: it would be better for all sides to continue the fiction that Italy will pay, eventually. Perhaps there could be some notional 0.5% interest paid on the money.
Brexit will change the face of the European Union in many ways. For one, it will make it a lot whiter.
In a bloc that hasn’t placed much focus on increasing the political representation of minorities, the U.K. stands out. Its history of conversations about race relations is wholly different from most of Europe. It’s home to some of the most extensive anti-discrimination legislation and scholarly discussions around race. And it tracks and actively promotes minority leadership in politics and businesses through government-funded programs....
.....Of the 17 MEPs of an ethnic minority background, eight are from the U.K. Beyond the elected officials, the U.K. employs many of the assistants and advisers from minority backgrounds in the Parliament.
“After Brexit, in terms of fighting racism and discrimination, the EU is going to be worse off,” Alfiaz Vaiya, the coordinator of the Parliament’s anti-racism and diversity intergroup, said. “It’s losing a fundamental member state that, whether under Labour or Conservative governments, has advocated for anti-discrimination policy.”
Why is thought the police under estimate numbers? I can't see why they would be biased or are they just awful at it?
Why did they not give an estimate this time? Have they stopped doing so or was it just too big to give a sensible number?
Did they provide a number for the Iraq and Countryside march?
I imagine the police have to justify their overtime bill on most marches, and also build their experience for how many to have on hand for the next one. They are used to handling non-political crowds as well so I would imagine that they have a pretty good idea.
The one last Saturday must have foxed them because way more people turned up than anyone expected - there were nowhere near as many stewards as you'd expect and things like stickers and leaflets ran out really early. Had there been any trouble the boys in blue might have struggled because there really weren't many of them either compared to protesters. There were also large groups roaming around away from the advertised route.
I think the police simply gave up trying to count because it was so big.
The lack of police at the march was surprising. I did not see a single one and if there were stewards they were not obvious. I felt sorry for the passengers in cars and lorries stuck in Park Lane - the road should have been closed much earlier.
There were a couple by the start line looking bemused, but very few otherwise. There were a few at the exit on Parliament square. Traffic was not stopped early enough, so some cars were stuck for ages. Not enough stewards either.
A very well behaved crowd though, no arrests and not even much litter. Little or no policing was needed, apart from stopping traffic.
Wonder if there were more for Farage's 1600 loons?
Corbyn is unlikely to win a majority in a general election tomorrow but he could still become PM even if the Tories are largest party with SNP confidence and supply and LD support on key legislation
*"People's Vote" is just dishonest. And prefixing it with a hash tag makes me embarrassed for the hash tagger
... as opposed to 'MPs Vote'?
How many "People's Vote" supporters would mind if Brexit was stopped without a second referendum?
I, personally, think that would be asking for trouble. It started with a referendum; it should end with one as wrll (rightly or wrongly).
Much though I am very sympathetic to the marchers in their opposition to no deal lunacy, I really do not want to see another referendum on any subject, ever!
*"People's Vote" is just dishonest. And prefixing it with a hash tag makes me embarrassed for the hash tagger
... as opposed to 'MPs Vote'?
How many "People's Vote" supporters would mind if Brexit was stopped without a second referendum?
I, personally, think that would be asking for trouble. It started with a referendum; it should end with one as wrll (rightly or wrongly).
Much though I am very sympathetic to the marchers in their opposition to no deal lunacy, I really do not want to see another referendum on any subject, ever!
If it goes to No Deal lunacy after November even I will be marching for EUref2
*"People's Vote" is just dishonest. And prefixing it with a hash tag makes me embarrassed for the hash tagger
... as opposed to 'MPs Vote'?
How many "People's Vote" supporters would mind if Brexit was stopped without a second referendum?
I, personally, think that would be asking for trouble. It started with a referendum; it should end with one as wrll (rightly or wrongly).
Much though I am very sympathetic to the marchers in their opposition to no deal lunacy, I really do not want to see another referendum on any subject, ever!
Neither do I. Not only are they undemocratic and devisive, they do my head in as well.
*"People's Vote" is just dishonest. And prefixing it with a hash tag makes me embarrassed for the hash tagger
... as opposed to 'MPs Vote'?
How many "People's Vote" supporters would mind if Brexit was stopped without a second referendum?
I, personally, think that would be asking for trouble. It started with a referendum; it should end with one as wrll (rightly or wrongly).
Much though I am very sympathetic to the marchers in their opposition to no deal lunacy, I really do not want to see another referendum on any subject, ever!
If it goes to No Deal lunacy after November even I will be marching for EUref2
I hope that's not what he's advocating. The usual case cited in support is the Poll Tax. But that policy was reversed not because of riots, but because of the Lichfield by-election, which gave the Govt the message that if they pressed on with the poll tax they would be heading for electoral meltdown.
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
I hope that's not what he's advocating. The usual case cited in support is the Poll Tax. But that policy was reversed not because of riots, but because of the Lichfield by-election, which gave the Govt the message that if they pressed on with the poll tax they would be heading for electoral meltdown.
Smashing up inner city Liverpool resulted in Heseltine and big bucks for inner city rebuilds.
She was on top form yesterday going through every nook and cranny of Brexit. Seems like the lobby hacks (Who seem desperate for a leadership contest) are going to be swept away by a ferocious desk smashing performance. She must be hoping Corbyn will lead on Brexit tommorow too. Though I expect she'll be brushing up on universal credit this evening too.
But the German car industry will be on the phone shortly to make them change their minds......
I don't think.
How long do you have to go back to find when the UK political class mis-read a diplomatic situation so badly?
The 1930s I think. Most politicians at that time convinced themselves that Hitler's grievances were genuine and If they were resolved everything would carry on much as before.
Just as today politicians have convinced themselves that if a satisfactory Brexit deal can be negotiated everything will carry on much as before.
The 1930s generation of politicians has been judged harshly by history and today's leaders can expect the same. Cameron in particular will be seen to have made one of the most catastrophic political misjudgements of any British PM.
Ministers agree to lead a campaign to celebrate and safeguard the UK, following fears Brexit could drive a wedge between Britain and NI or fuel calls for Scottish independence
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
Worth remembering that the EU's actual tariffs on agricultural products are much lower than headline rates, due to free trade agreements with African exporters, and the fact that tariff free quotas for Latin America are often not filled.
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
Ministers agree to lead a campaign to celebrate and safeguard the UK, following fears Brexit could drive a wedge between Britain and NI or fuel calls for Scottish independence
Ministers agree to lead a campaign to celebrate and safeguard the UK, following fears Brexit could drive a wedge between Britain and NI or fuel calls for Scottish independence
Your link appears to be a non sequitur. As for the Union, it's a dead critter walking. The Unionists have to be lucky every time, the SNP only once. No one really wants Northern Ireland, not even Dublin. Nothing wrong with England + Waleshire.
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
Worth remembering that the EU's actual tariffs on agricultural products are much lower than headline rates, due to free trade agreements with African exporters, and the fact that tariff free quotas for Latin America are often not filled.
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
Loyal MPs to the PM are believed to have sent 8 letters demanding a leadership vote disguised as rebels in a 'cunning plan' by Mayites, the idea being to withdraw some of the decoys if the 48 letters needed to trigger a ballot is reached, creating a delay and alerting the whips to the danger.
Rebel MPs meanwhile have a counter plot to deluge Sir Graham Brady with a dozen letters to ensure a confidence vote cannot be stopped
I did jest that Picadilly offered some excellent looting and window smashing opportunities, but sadly my fellow marchers were as well behaved as a Sunday School outing, even the party of anarchists.
Loyal MPs to the PM are believed to have sent 8 letters demanding a leadership vote disguised as rebels in a 'cunning plan' by Mayites, the idea being to withdraw sone of the decoys if the 48 letters needed to trigger a ballot is reached, creating a delay and alerting the whips to the danger.
Rebel MPs meanwhile have a counter plot to deluge Sir Graham Vradybwith a dozen letters to ensure a confidence vote cannot be stopped
Whether May faces a leadership vote or not the fact these mad "decoy plots" are even being discussed makes it appear the whole thing is falling apart...
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
Worth remembering that the EU's actual tariffs on agricultural products are much lower than headline rates, due to free trade agreements with African exporters, and the fact that tariff free quotas for Latin America are often not filled.
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
Worth remembering that the EU's actual tariffs on agricultural products are much lower than headline rates, due to free trade agreements with African exporters, and the fact that tariff free quotas for Latin America are often not filled.
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
I thought you lived in California?
Christmas prezzies for OGH?
But surely OGH as a good Remainer would only wine from France?
Loyal MPs to the PM are believed to have sent 8 letters demanding a leadership vote disguised as rebels in a 'cunning plan' by Mayites, the idea being to withdraw sone of the decoys if the 48 letters needed to trigger a ballot is reached, creating a delay and alerting the whips to the danger.
Rebel MPs meanwhile have a counter plot to deluge Sir Graham Vradybwith a dozen letters to ensure a confidence vote cannot be stopped
Whether May faces a leadership vote or not the fact these mad "decoy plots" are even being discussed makes it appear the whole thing is falling apart...
It's clearly a silly plan, since I suggested it months ago.
Jeremy Corbyn's brother Piers calls politicians on the 'Goldman Sachs Super Rich Wall Street' People's Vote March as complicit in the '4th Reich'.
He also called Bernie Sanders, the 'Progressive' Jewish US Senator 'the single greatest fake progressive double agent for Wall Street' and a 'deluded, deranged dud' who 'took Clinton's 30 pieces of silver'
Ministers agree to lead a campaign to celebrate and safeguard the UK, following fears Brexit could drive a wedge between Britain and NI or fuel calls for Scottish independence
Your link appears to be a non sequitur. As for the Union, it's a dead critter walking. The Unionists have to be lucky every time, the SNP only once. No one really wants Northern Ireland, not even Dublin. Nothing wrong with England + Waleshire.
The same was said of Quebec, devomax and avoiding a No Deal Brexit not even English voters want would help
Jeremy Corbyn's brother Piers calls politicians on the 'Goldman Sachs Super Rich Wall Street' People's Vote March as complicit in the '4th Reich'.
He also called Bernie Sanders, the 'Progressive' Jewish US Senator 'the single greatest fake progressive double agent for Wall Street' and a 'deluded, deranged dud' who 'took Clinton's 30 pieces of silver'
There are plenty of people, like PIers COrbyn and Chris Williamson, who demonstrate to any doubters that in fact there are people who would be much worse as Labour leader than Jeremy.
Ministers agree to lead a campaign to celebrate and safeguard the UK, following fears Brexit could drive a wedge between Britain and NI or fuel calls for Scottish independence
Your link appears to be a non sequitur. As for the Union, it's a dead critter walking. The Unionists have to be lucky every time, the SNP only once. No one really wants Northern Ireland, not even Dublin. Nothing wrong with England + Waleshire.
Ministers agree to lead a campaign to celebrate and safeguard the UK, following fears Brexit could drive a wedge between Britain and NI or fuel calls for Scottish independence
Jeremy Corbyn's brother Piers calls politicians on the 'Goldman Sachs Super Rich Wall Street' People's Vote March as complicit in the '4th Reich'.
He also called Bernie Sanders, the 'Progressive' Jewish US Senator 'the single greatest fake progressive double agent for Wall Street' and a 'deluded, deranged dud' who 'took Clinton's 30 pieces of silver'
There are plenty of people, like PIers COrbyn and Chris Williamson, who demonstrate to any doubters that in fact there are people who would be much worse as Labour leader than Jeremy.
Below shows why getting rid of May has suddenly become optional.
She makes her speech with her four points - and the EU ignore her and reply with exactly the same offer that was rejected last week.
This does not help her one iota. The EU have not moved at all - they still want the NI backstop, they still insist the UK backstop can only be agreed after Brexit, it is all still permament. That is the same deal Raab ran over to reject.
It is obvious that the EU see the CU as the end point. But May promised in blood yesterday that the EU were going to agree the endpoint of the trade agreement now and that would mean the backstop would be out of the way ‘well before the next election’.
She is never going to get a deal for one very simple reason - the EU think she is so weak she will cave and give them everything they want. But having made her commitments yesterday, she can’t row back.
I say leave her there. The ERG don’t even have to worry much about Chequers any more because she can’t even solve the backstop. She is the same as always - utterly delusional about what she can get the EU to agree. Might as well let her crash and burn.
President Trump declares himself 'a nationalist' as opposed to 'a globalist who wants the world to do well, frankly not caring about our country so much'
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
Worth remembering that the EU's actual tariffs on agricultural products are much lower than headline rates, due to free trade agreements with African exporters, and the fact that tariff free quotas for Latin America are often not filled.
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
I thought you lived in California?
Christmas prezzies for OGH?
But surely OGH as a good Remainer would only wine from France?
Why is thought the police under estimate numbers? I can't see why they would be biased or are they just awful at it?
Why did they not give an estimate this time? Have they stopped doing so or was it just too big to give a sensible number?
Did they provide a number for the Iraq and Countryside march?
I suspect the Met Police wanted to avoid getting embroiled in a political row by estimating numbers so instead steered clear. The result has been to leave the field clear for estimates by the 2nd Ref organisers alone.
I stand by what I said the other day/this morning (which I see seems to have triggered a few Remainers on the previous thread) between 250-300k people, and lower than the Countryside Alliance March.
I don’t think it’s anywhere near 700,000, and 400,000 is probably the absolute ceiling.
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
on the other hand how does the EU guarantee its banking system ? if Italy is let go investors would lose faith in the Euro and then the dominoes line up Greece, Spain, Portugal France turmoil for the rEurozone
The EU can guarantee its banking system by the ECB making clear it will make banks whole on interbank losses.
which is of course a confidence call, If the ECB just taken a huge hit on Target2 how confident would you be ?
Target2 is not simply an Italian liability to the German Government. There is a corresponding liability from the German Government to German Commercial banks. Thus if Italy defaults, the liability becomes one of the German Government. Oops.
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
Worth remembering that the EU's actual tariffs on agricultural products are much lower than headline rates, due to free trade agreements with African exporters, and the fact that tariff free quotas for Latin America are often not filled.
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
I thought you lived in California?
Christmas prezzies for OGH?
But surely OGH as a good Remainer would only wine from France?
Under a Trump/Mogg FTA with the USA, Californian wine could be labelled as French.
We have spent 40 years integrating our economy into the EU. The Brexiteers think that we can leave in less than two years with no plan thought-out in advance and zero preparation
Can you honestly not see where the problem is?
Why should the UK prepare to be different, when we are starting out the same?
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
Worth remembering that the EU's actual tariffs on agricultural products are much lower than headline rates, due to free trade agreements with African exporters, and the fact that tariff free quotas for Latin America are often not filled.
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
I thought you lived in California?
Christmas prezzies for OGH?
But surely OGH as a good Remainer would only wine from France?
Under a Trump/Mogg FTA with the USA, Californian wine could be labelled as French.
..and every bottle would contain a chlorinated chicken.
Interesting quote from this article about the shortcomings of the Third Way:
"Presented with President Clinton’s programme of paid national and community service, the Left wanted funds without individual responsibility, while the Right wanted responsibility without funds."
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
on the other hand how does the EU guarantee its banking system ? if Italy is let go investors would lose faith in the Euro and then the dominoes line up Greece, Spain, Portugal France turmoil for the rEurozone
The EU can guarantee its banking system by the ECB making clear it will make banks whole on interbank losses.
which is of course a confidence call, If the ECB just taken a huge hit on Target2 how confident would you be ?
Target2 is not simply an Italian liability to the German Government. There is a corresponding liability from the German Government to German Commercial banks. Thus if Italy defaults, the liability becomes one of the German Government. Oops.
No.
German banks will continue to have balances at the ECB they will be able to withdraw at will. In what circumstances do you think the ECB would fail to honour obligations, given it can print money on demand.
Another reading is that if Labour were led by someone who has never marched gleefully under Stalin banners they'd be miles ahead.
It would be interesting to hear Corbyn's views on the report by a human rights organisation on torture and other ill-treatment meted out by Hamas and the Palestinian authorities to dissidents, reported on the Six O'Clock news this evening.
What sanctions does the EU have against Italy if they go ahead with the budget?
Investors only buy Italian government debt because it is implicitly guaranteed by the ECB.
If the ECB removes the guarantee wouldn't it ultimately fall out in the currency though ?
Yes.
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
IMF support, gold bonds. The interesting question is what happens to EU membership. Falling out of the EMU is something they may recover from fairly quickly because of the automatic stabilisers, but will the EU also seek to kick them out completely. It's not as if Italy is semi-detached like the UK, it is wholly reliant on the EU for trade (70% vs our 40%).
Comments
"PB Groundhog Day wouldn't be complete without this argument getting trotted out..."
And your answer to it is …?
However, if the cabinet fractures that is a different ball game
[Edit: it was the post immediately preceding yours]
And in an entirely unpleasant way. How would Italy import food or fuel?
If a British PM came out and said. "We won't have a hard border in Ireland," what could the EU do?
How about … "If you don't build one, we'll be obstructive in discussions."
"Like now, you mean," would be the response. The original paper tiger.
It may be boring, but that's because the EU can't answer it
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/28/demonstrations-protests-uk-list
Crude rule of thumb; "Take organiser estimate, then halve it" (Though not for the Countryside march where Police & Organiser estimates matched.
https://www.politico.eu/article/philip-hammond-brexit-ireland-uk-will-enforce-hard-border-in-ireland-if-there-is-no-brexit-deal/
Of course we could choose not to become WTO members, and join an illustrious group of counties including Somalia, Eritrea and North Korea...
A fine route to poverty and civil insurrection. [ok, maybe that's a teensy-weensy bit hyperbolic]
It's uncomfortable for some, but one of the reasons the UK is so attractive to FDI is that we are law-abiding, consistent and fair. That's part of our brand and we trash that at our peril (of course, some Ultras believe that we've already done that by voting for Brexit).
If the WTO is anything like the EU, you and I would be long dead before any infraction proceedings took place. But thanks for attempting to answer it.
Mr Glenn, No cigar I'm afraid.
I don't think.
In a bloc that hasn’t placed much focus on increasing the political representation of minorities, the U.K. stands out. Its history of conversations about race relations is wholly different from most of Europe. It’s home to some of the most extensive anti-discrimination legislation and scholarly discussions around race. And it tracks and actively promotes minority leadership in politics and businesses through government-funded programs....
.....Of the 17 MEPs of an ethnic minority background, eight are from the U.K. Beyond the elected officials, the U.K. employs many of the assistants and advisers from minority backgrounds in the Parliament.
“After Brexit, in terms of fighting racism and discrimination, the EU is going to be worse off,” Alfiaz Vaiya, the coordinator of the Parliament’s anti-racism and diversity intergroup, said. “It’s losing a fundamental member state that, whether under Labour or Conservative governments, has advocated for anti-discrimination policy.”
https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-diversity-exits-the-eu-brussels/amp/
A very well behaved crowd though, no arrests and not even much litter. Little or no policing was needed, apart from stopping traffic.
It is worth remembering that they could do this in a fairly smart manner: they would effectively enter into swap agreements with EU banks to eliminate currency risk. This means the total size of the subsidy would be in the €80-100bn range.
Simply: I don't see any circumstances where the ECB allows a preventable banking run.
Probably a similar proportion to the supporters of the Referendum Party/UKIP who would've been quite happy for Brexit to have happened sans referendum.
Both sides are pretty disingenuous and guilty of dressing up self-interest as 'democracy'. Democracy is brilliant when people agree with you...
Suspension of A50 could happen that way in the meantime.
I don't think that very likely: it would be better for all sides to continue the fiction that Italy will pay, eventually. Perhaps there could be some notional 0.5% interest paid on the money.
Time for domestic duties to resume.....
It started with a referendum; it should end with one as wrll (rightly or wrongly).
Sadly, that might also be the rarest.
https://twitter.com/adamboultonSKY/status/1054419455781036032
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1054703276564856832
https://twitter.com/lisaocarroll/status/1054701601796046848
The UK's full integration with the EU economy will continue at the point of leaving, as UK regulation will at that point be in full alignment with EU regulation. Only over time is there potential for those regulations to diverge, and there is plenty of time to manage that process. Nor should the existence of some limited divergence be an issue in the short term. The EU has in place free trade agreements with other countries (e.g. Canada) whose regulations diverge significantly from those of the EU, but not substantially enough to matter.
So the only real issue is that of tariffs on goods, which only become an issue if the EU want them to be. Given that they sell us twice as much as we sell them, the risks to the EU are manifest in contrast to those to the UK. Some tariff barriers may indeed be a useful tool to help the UK start to reverse the wholesale loss of manufacturing capacity that occured following our joining in the 1970s. However, given that tariffs under WTO rules have averaged around 2% for non-agricultural goods, and 14% for agricultural goods, then their significance is not as great as you may suppose. Bear in mind too that leaving the EU will free the UK of the requirement to continue with high tariffs on agricultural products from outside the EU, so leaving the protectionist EU is hardly a protectionist act.
But a very ill-judged tweet I would say.
She must be hoping Corbyn will lead on Brexit tommorow too. Though I expect she'll be brushing up on universal credit this evening too.
Hah !
However, the incompetence of May, intransigence of the EU, and brevity of Article 50 did reduce the odds on it happening.
Anyway, I must be off. Play nicely, everyone.
Just as today politicians have convinced themselves that if a satisfactory Brexit deal can be negotiated everything will carry on much as before.
The 1930s generation of politicians has been judged harshly by history and today's leaders can expect the same. Cameron in particular will be seen to have made one of the most catastrophic political misjudgements of any British PM.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/cabinet-divided-over-no10-fear-for-irelands-future-leader-a3969026.html?amp
I'm looking forward to cheaper Australian and New Zealand wine, but that's just my priorities.
Rebel MPs meanwhile have a counter plot to deluge Sir Graham Brady with a dozen letters to ensure a confidence vote cannot be stopped
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/no10-planted-decoy-letters-demanding-pm-confidence-vote-tories-claim-a3969371.html?amp
He also called Bernie Sanders, the 'Progressive' Jewish US Senator 'the single greatest fake progressive double agent for Wall Street' and a 'deluded, deranged dud' who 'took Clinton's 30 pieces of silver'
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/the-londoner-corbyns-brothers-antisemitic-rant-a3969016.html?amp
That suggests to me that behind the scenes they are debating Michel Barnier’s negotiating lines.
She makes her speech with her four points - and the EU ignore her and reply with exactly the same offer that was rejected last week.
This does not help her one iota. The EU have not moved at all - they still want the NI backstop, they still insist the UK backstop can only be agreed after Brexit, it is all still permament. That is the same deal Raab ran over to reject.
It is obvious that the EU see the CU as the end point. But May promised in blood yesterday that the EU were going to agree the endpoint of the trade agreement now and that would mean the backstop would be out of the way ‘well before the next election’.
She is never going to get a deal for one very simple reason - the EU think she is so weak she will cave and give them everything they want. But having made her commitments yesterday, she can’t row back.
I say leave her there. The ERG don’t even have to worry much about Chequers any more because she can’t even solve the backstop. She is the same as always - utterly delusional about what she can get the EU to agree. Might as well let her crash and burn.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/embedded?v=6.7.21.21.arm&hl=en-GB#vgi=1005___f1&ampcu=https%3A%2F%2Fglobalnews.ca%2Fnews%2F4584546%2Fdonald-trump-nationalist-rally-texas%2F&amp=https%3A%2F%2Fglobalnews.ca%2Fnews%2F4584546%2Fdonald-trump-nationalist-rally-texas%2Famp%2F&ampidx=0
I stand by what I said the other day/this morning (which I see seems to have triggered a few Remainers on the previous thread) between 250-300k people, and lower than the Countryside Alliance March.
I don’t think it’s anywhere near 700,000, and 400,000 is probably the absolute ceiling.
Interesting quote from this article about the shortcomings of the Third Way:
"Presented with President Clinton’s programme of paid national and community service, the Left wanted funds without individual responsibility, while the Right wanted responsibility without funds."
https://unherd.com/2018/10/third-way-lost-way
German banks will continue to have balances at the ECB they will be able to withdraw at will. In what circumstances do you think the ECB would fail to honour obligations, given it can print money on demand.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45958713