I can't help feeling that Thursday last week was the peak day for Brexit hysteria. Today the FTSE and Sterling are both recovering somewhat, the ERG are looking increasingly irrelevant as well as irrational, the cabinet rewrite is looking like a damp squib and R5 no less are debating whether May is dogged or deluded with the majority going for the former. By the end of the week we will have May going off to agree her deal, or something very, very like it with the EU who in turn will be progressing the necessary steps for their agreement.
So is this over? Far from it. It is still very hard to make a case for how May gets this deal through Parliament. Until there is a viable path to this we seem somewhat stuck and the idea of a second referendum is likely to grow in strength. It is also concerning that it is May once again out in front seeking support for her deal with business today. Hammond, Hunt and Javid all still seem to have more important things to do. Is this at her insistence? If so, her cabinet should have overruled her.
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
Apparently many of the people who support "no deal" think it means revert to the status quo
I can't help feeling that Thursday last week was the peak day for Brexit hysteria. Today the FTSE and Sterling are both recovering somewhat, the ERG are looking increasingly irrelevant as well as irrational, the cabinet rewrite is looking like a damp squib and R5 no less are debating whether May is dogged or deluded with the majority going for the former. By the end of the week we will have May going off to agree her deal, or something very, very like it with the EU who in turn will be progressing the necessary steps for their agreement.
So is this over? Far from it. It is still very hard to make a case for how May gets this deal through Parliament. Until there is a viable path to this we seem somewhat stuck and the idea of a second referendum is likely to grow in strength. It is also concerning that it is May once again out in front seeking support for her deal with business today. Hammond, Hunt and Javid all still seem to have more important things to do. Is this at her insistence? If so, her cabinet should have overruled her.
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
At least the Remainers would stop talking about Brexit on here.....
At last we now know what happened to ace negotiator Boris Johnson and his water cannon he bought second-hand off the Germans. Three unusable water cannon bought by Boris Johnson when he was mayor of London have been sold for scrap, at a net loss of more than £300,000.
He also spent a shed-load on a bridge that will never be built, on a cable car that no-one uses and on bikes that no-one rides. He does speak some Latin, though, so he must be extraordinarily clever.
Bikes "that no-one uses"? Pillock!
Wiki: "More than 73.5 million journeys have been made using the cycles since 2010, with the record for cycle hires in a single day of 73,000.
London’s government-funded Boris bike hire scheme has cost taxpayers nearly £200 million over the last eight years, according to a disclosure made to Verdict under the UK Freedom of Information (FoI) Act. The total net government expenditure on the scheme so far is £195 million – which works out at around £17,000 for each of the 11,500 hire bikes currently in circulation. https://www.verdict.co.uk/londons-boris-bikes-scheme-has-cost-taxpayers-nearly-200m-foi-disclosure-reveals/
A triumph.
A triumph of avoiding the fact that you said "no-one" uses them - when in fact they have been used for 73.5m journeys. At a subsidy of about £2.50 a journey. Is that a cost you think very poor value for money?
If enough people were using them the subsidy would not be needed. And unlike buses (which Johnson also wasted huge amounts on) and trains, they are not necessary, they are a nice to have.
Cable cars, garden bridges, stadiums, bikes, buses and his own staff costs - Johnson's record is there for all to see.
I can't help feeling that Thursday last week was the peak day for Brexit hysteria. Today the FTSE and Sterling are both recovering somewhat, the ERG are looking increasingly irrelevant as well as irrational, the cabinet rewrite is looking like a damp squib and R5 no less are debating whether May is dogged or deluded with the majority going for the former. By the end of the week we will have May going off to agree her deal, or something very, very like it with the EU who in turn will be progressing the necessary steps for their agreement.
So is this over? Far from it. It is still very hard to make a case for how May gets this deal through Parliament. Until there is a viable path to this we seem somewhat stuck and the idea of a second referendum is likely to grow in strength. It is also concerning that it is May once again out in front seeking support for her deal with business today. Hammond, Hunt and Javid all still seem to have more important things to do. Is this at her insistence? If so, her cabinet should have overruled her.
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
At last we now know what happened to ace negotiator Boris Johnson and his water cannon he bought second-hand off the Germans. Three unusable water cannon bought by Boris Johnson when he was mayor of London have been sold for scrap, at a net loss of more than £300,000.
He also spent a shed-load on a bridge that will never be built, on a cable car that no-one uses and on bikes that no-one rides. He does speak some Latin, though, so he must be extraordinarily clever.
Bikes "that no-one uses"? Pillock!
Wiki: "More than 73.5 million journeys have been made using the cycles since 2010, with the record for cycle hires in a single day of 73,000.
London’s government-funded Boris bike hire scheme has cost taxpayers nearly £200 million over the last eight years, according to a disclosure made to Verdict under the UK Freedom of Information (FoI) Act. The total net government expenditure on the scheme so far is £195 million – which works out at around £17,000 for each of the 11,500 hire bikes currently in circulation. https://www.verdict.co.uk/londons-boris-bikes-scheme-has-cost-taxpayers-nearly-200m-foi-disclosure-reveals/
A triumph.
Buses and the Tube are also subsidised, as are cars (via money spent building roads and so on). The question isn't whether Santander Cycles cost public money, it's whether they are a good investment or not of that money.
I agree. Buses and trains are not nice to haves, they are necessary. Could the £200 million have been better spent elsewhere? I suspect so.
At last we now know what happened to ace negotiator Boris Johnson and his water cannon he bought second-hand off the Germans. Three unusable water cannon bought by Boris Johnson when he was mayor of London have been sold for scrap, at a net loss of more than £300,000.
He also spent a shed-load on a bridge that will never be built, on a cable car that no-one uses and on bikes that no-one rides. He does speak some Latin, though, so he must be extraordinarily clever.
Bikes "that no-one uses"? Pillock!
Wiki: "More than 73.5 million journeys have been made using the cycles since 2010, with the record for cycle hires in a single day of 73,000.
London’s government-funded Boris bike hire scheme has cost taxpayers nearly £200 million over the last eight years, according to a disclosure made to Verdict under the UK Freedom of Information (FoI) Act. The total net government expenditure on the scheme so far is £195 million – which works out at around £17,000 for each of the 11,500 hire bikes currently in circulation. https://www.verdict.co.uk/londons-boris-bikes-scheme-has-cost-taxpayers-nearly-200m-foi-disclosure-reveals/
A triumph.
Buses and the Tube are also subsidised, as are cars (via money spent building roads and so on). The question isn't whether Santander Cycles cost public money, it's whether they are a good investment or not of that money.
They are a good investment. The more cyclists the better. I suppose some people don't like them because they're "more likely to be used by middle-class Londoners" or something like that.
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
Apparently many of the people who support "no deal" think it means revert to the status quo
Opinium was quite specific that it was "Leave the EU with No Deal."
First preference was Remain 32%, Leave with No Deal 24%, Leave with Deal 21%. If Leave with Deal managed to edge into second place in a referendum, then I expect it would win quite easily on transfers.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
It's clear that a lot of MPs and opinion formers don't understand the distinction between the WA and final FTA.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
Think I would die laughing.
But the truth is that imho at least some of them don't really want a deal. They want to carry on arguing and causing chaos and trouble for a few more years. It is all just a game to some.
I can't help feeling that Thursday last week was the peak day for Brexit hysteria. Today the FTSE and Sterling are both recovering somewhat, the ERG are looking increasingly irrelevant as well as irrational, the cabinet rewrite is looking like a damp squib and R5 no less are debating whether May is dogged or deluded with the majority going for the former. By the end of the week we will have May going off to agree her deal, or something very, very like it with the EU who in turn will be progressing the necessary steps for their agreement.
So is this over? Far from it. It is still very hard to make a case for how May gets this deal through Parliament. Until there is a viable path to this we seem somewhat stuck and the idea of a second referendum is likely to grow in strength. It is also concerning that it is May once again out in front seeking support for her deal with business today. Hammond, Hunt and Javid all still seem to have more important things to do. Is this at her insistence? If so, her cabinet should have overruled her.
Its almost as if every single prominent Tory is putting his/her career above all other considerations.
What have we done to deserve such a bunch of self absorbed creeps?
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
It's clear that a lot of MPs and opinion formers don't understand the distinction between the WA and final FTA.
I can't help feeling that Thursday last week was the peak day for Brexit hysteria. Today the FTSE and Sterling are both recovering somewhat, the ERG are looking increasingly irrelevant as well as irrational, the cabinet rewrite is looking like a damp squib and R5 no less are debating whether May is dogged or deluded with the majority going for the former. By the end of the week we will have May going off to agree her deal, or something very, very like it with the EU who in turn will be progressing the necessary steps for their agreement.
So is this over? Far from it. It is still very hard to make a case for how May gets this deal through Parliament. Until there is a viable path to this we seem somewhat stuck and the idea of a second referendum is likely to grow in strength. It is also concerning that it is May once again out in front seeking support for her deal with business today. Hammond, Hunt and Javid all still seem to have more important things to do. Is this at her insistence? If so, her cabinet should have overruled her.
Someone who number crunched Opinium's numbers concluded that in the event of a three option second referendum, No Deal would beat Remain by 50.3% to 49.7%. Imagine the reaction to that!
At least the Remainers would stop talking about Brexit on here.....
It's certainly an argument for Be Careful What you Wish For.
At last we now know what happened to ace negotiator Boris Johnson and his water cannon he bought second-hand off the Germans. Three unusable water cannon bought by Boris Johnson when he was mayor of London have been sold for scrap, at a net loss of more than £300,000.
He also spent a shed-load on a bridge that will never be built, on a cable car that no-one uses and on bikes that no-one rides. He does speak some Latin, though, so he must be extraordinarily clever.
Bikes "that no-one uses"? Pillock!
Wiki: "More than 73.5 million journeys have been made using the cycles since 2010, with the record for cycle hires in a single day of 73,000.
London’s government-funded Boris bike hire scheme has cost taxpayers nearly £200 million over the last eight years, according to a disclosure made to Verdict under the UK Freedom of Information (FoI) Act. The total net government expenditure on the scheme so far is £195 million – which works out at around £17,000 for each of the 11,500 hire bikes currently in circulation. https://www.verdict.co.uk/londons-boris-bikes-scheme-has-cost-taxpayers-nearly-200m-foi-disclosure-reveals/
A triumph.
A triumph of avoiding the fact that you said "no-one" uses them - when in fact they have been used for 73.5m journeys. At a subsidy of about £2.50 a journey. Is that a cost you think very poor value for money?
If enough people were using them the subsidy would not be needed. And unlike buses (which Johnson also wasted huge amounts on) and trains, they are not necessary, they are a nice to have.
Cable cars, garden bridges, stadiums, bikes, buses and his own staff costs - Johnson's record is there for all to see.
That's pretty tedious sniping even by your standards. Bicycles exist as a subsidised entity, as they do in many major urban areas, as part of the public transport network. They seem to be popular and empty stands are common. The Chinese-style free access bicycles failed in Manchester I recall. Perhaps we should close down commuter trains.
As for the stadium, the essential question is what should have happened? The idea of a stand-alone athletics stadium of that size is nonsense and the only sport which can support arenas of that size in the UK is soccer. Now, there may be a discussion on terms but it is clear that soccer teams are willing to finance their own grounds so it's not as if it is a no-choice discussion.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
It's clear that a lot of MPs and opinion formers don't understand the distinction between the WA and final FTA.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
Think I would die laughing.
But the truth is that imho at least some of them don't really want a deal. They want to carry on arguing and causing chaos and trouble for a few more years. It is all just a game to some.
Please don't do that - we would miss your posts !!!!!
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal. I find it harder to understand the reasoning of those who insist the EU will give us everything we want and so will vote against on that basis. I'm sure some tweaks can be made, but 'exact same benefits' or, on the other side, something much more advantageous to us at no additional cost, do not seem particularly realistic and seem more like promises to gain power first and foremost.
Corbyn really did sound like the less scrupulous leave campaign slogans there. Insisting because we think it is in the EU's interest that they will give us what we want. You could even try to argue being overly optimistic might just be justified prior to commencement of negotiations, but as people rightly pointed out and some of us(such as me) did not listen hard enough at the time, the EU plays rough and tough and we have seen that.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
It's clear that a lot of MPs and opinion formers don't understand the distinction between the WA and final FTA.
Did you listen to Corbyn yesterday, he is in cloud cuckoo on Brexit and what he thinks he can negotiate
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
It's clear that a lot of MPs and opinion formers don't understand the distinction between the WA and final FTA.
Did you listen to Corbyn yesterday, he is in cloud cuckoo on Brexit and what he thinks he can negotiate
Well it becomes a question of degree. Everyone from the entire Labour party through to members of the Cabinet are saying we can negotiate some pretty major things still, so one being more unrealistic in aim or not is hardly going to sink in or sink him. Someone in that broad group is going to be right, but as a prospect I think changing government and later dealing with whether or not a negotiation would get what they want is top of the list rather than considering how likely that is. That's not even a guess, since it is Labour policy.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
It's clear that a lot of MPs and opinion formers don't understand the distinction between the WA and final FTA.
It also implies capital costs of ~£13m in the year which sounds like work expanding the scheme to me (I'm not clear on whether the cost of replacing lost or stolen bikes is an operating cost - I think it should be)
Let's have a sensible MP from Devon. A Brexiteer. 20,000 majority. Someone who knows the ins and outs of the current Brexit Deal better than May. Respected by Cabinet to tell it how it is. Loved by Conference this year. A true unity candidate.
Let's have a couple of years of Geoffrey Cox, to calm the party and the nation.
(And he's a Cambridge man, so how could TSE object?)
Jeremy Hunt for me.
I’ll win around 16k if it is Hunt.
Being serious though, do you think he would be a good choice even without that reason?
Yes. He’s tough as boots.
He would, importantly, win. My Labour supporting good as MiL who is a retired Doctor thinks he's one of the sensible ones - and just listen to all the noise Labour has been making on the NHS recently; it's like one of those tree falling in the forest questions.
There feels like much more hate for Gove than Hunt, and they have been in similar high profile pro-labour areas Education and Health. Personally if Javid and Hunt work together I can’t see past that. None of the high profile leavers would win a general election - if you think the Tories will be punished for Brexit then a leaver will be punished more, and I see no stand out candidate among them.
I will throw my prediction in again. Javid would break a taboo in the Tory party both with his ethnic background but also where he comes from. Go and look at the area of Bristol he grew up in Google streetview.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
It's clear that a lot of MPs and opinion formers don't understand the distinction between the WA and final FTA.
Or more likely are dishonestly pretending not to.
There's a simply staggering amount of dishonesty on both sides. Listening to Uncle Vince this morning on the radio was another exercie in wishful thinking.
Regardless of how much you like or dislike the Deal, May's had an impossible task.
She's had to try to reconcile a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible, and just plain daft requirements.
All while leading a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible and just plain daft MPs.
She had no chance, really.
She took it on willingly of course, no one forced her to, but she has belatedly cobbled something together and it is dispiriting that people are still fighting the last campaign, and being just prone to over simplification and ignoring any potential risks, with an eye on future elections.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all. Everyone's fucked off with it and leavers are dying of old age every day at greater than replacement rate.
That's pretty tedious sniping even by your standards. Bicycles exist as a subsidised entity, as they do in many major urban areas, as part of the public transport network. They seem to be popular and empty stands are common. The Chinese-style free access bicycles failed in Manchester I recall. Perhaps we should close down commuter trains.
As for the stadium, the essential question is what should have happened? The idea of a stand-alone athletics stadium of that size is nonsense and the only sport which can support arenas of that size in the UK is soccer. Now, there may be a discussion on terms but it is clear that soccer teams are willing to finance their own grounds so it's not as if it is a no-choice discussion.
The stadium has been an absolute scandal. However IMO the main issue was that the stadium's legacy was not decided *before* it was built, leaving us with an expensive-to-maintain hot potato.
And I doubt that was Boris's fault, but Ken's mayoral regime and Labour, who initiated the Olympics project.
I would have hoped the lessons of the Millennium Dome's troubled first decade to have been learned, but apparently not.
I don't want to defend Boris totally: the Garden Bridge was a hideous idea, incredibly poorly and (IMO) corruptly implemented.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
This deal will not pass the HoC. It's now clearly a choice of no deal or no Brexit.
Mark Stone, Sky, confirms the 2022 extension is now in the WDA
Can we agree to an extension and continue negotiating a deal (or no deal exit) ?
I assume post 2022 the backstop would trigger pending the deal
But are the EU open to more negotiation in that time?
They are required by the treaty to negotiate in good faith, with reviews through an arbitration panel of two representatives from each side and an independent arbitrator
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
This deal will not pass the HoC. It's now clearly a choice of no deal or no Brexit.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
This deal will not pass the HoC. It's now clearly a choice of no deal or no Brexit.
If only the MPs agreed that though. Hundreds of them are still, officially, pushing for new deal, Labour and Tory alike.
Regardless of how much you like or dislike the Deal, May's had an impossible task.
She's had to try to reconcile a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible, and just plain daft requirements.
All while leading a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible and just plain daft MPs.
She had no chance, really.
She took it on willingly of course, no one forced her to, but she has belatedly cobbled something together and it is dispiriting that people are still fighting the last campaign, and being just prone to over simplification and ignoring any potential risks, with an eye on future elections.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
There's the other huge bit of nonsense he says too in there....
That's pretty tedious sniping even by your standards. Bicycles exist as a subsidised entity, as they do in many major urban areas, as part of the public transport network. They seem to be popular and empty stands are common. The Chinese-style free access bicycles failed in Manchester I recall. Perhaps we should close down commuter trains.
As for the stadium, the essential question is what should have happened? The idea of a stand-alone athletics stadium of that size is nonsense and the only sport which can support arenas of that size in the UK is soccer. Now, there may be a discussion on terms but it is clear that soccer teams are willing to finance their own grounds so it's not as if it is a no-choice discussion.
The stadium has been an absolute scandal. However IMO the main issue was that the stadium's legacy was not decided *before* it was built, leaving us with an expensive-to-maintain hot potato.
And I doubt that was Boris's fault, but Ken's mayoral regime and Labour, who initiated the Olympics project.
I would have hoped the lessons of the Millennium Dome's troubled first decade to have been learned, but apparently not.
I don't want to defend Boris totally: the Garden Bridge was a hideous idea, incredibly poorly and (IMO) corruptly implemented.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
This deal will not pass the HoC. It's now clearly a choice of no deal or no Brexit.
If it boils down to that, it will be No-Brexit. The HoC will never allow No-deal.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
Regardless of how much you like or dislike the Deal, May's had an impossible task.
She's had to try to reconcile a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible, and just plain daft requirements.
All while leading a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible and just plain daft MPs.
She had no chance, really.
But apparently anyone could have done better. Even me ...
The problem is the failure of people to compromise: some remainers, but mostly the hardcore Brexiteers. And also of many Brexiteers to admit the mistakes *they* made that has led to this. Instead they'd rather blame anyone else (as long as that 'anyone' is a remainer).
It's pathetic.
I'd also keep a certain amount if disdain for those in other political parties, who are willing to see the deal go down, and all the chaos that will entail, because they think it will be good for their party.
That's pretty tedious sniping even by your standards. Bicycles exist as a subsidised entity, as they do in many major urban areas, as part of the public transport network. They seem to be popular and empty stands are common. The Chinese-style free access bicycles failed in Manchester I recall. Perhaps we should close down commuter trains.
As for the stadium, the essential question is what should have happened? The idea of a stand-alone athletics stadium of that size is nonsense and the only sport which can support arenas of that size in the UK is soccer. Now, there may be a discussion on terms but it is clear that soccer teams are willing to finance their own grounds so it's not as if it is a no-choice discussion.
The stadium has been an absolute scandal. However IMO the main issue was that the stadium's legacy was not decided *before* it was built, leaving us with an expensive-to-maintain hot potato.
And I doubt that was Boris's fault, but Ken's mayoral regime and Labour, who initiated the Olympics project.
I would have hoped the lessons of the Millennium Dome's troubled first decade to have been learned, but apparently not.
I don't want to defend Boris totally: the Garden Bridge was a hideous idea, incredibly poorly and (IMO) corruptly implemented.
I can't help feeling that Thursday last week was the peak day for Brexit hysteria. Today the FTSE and Sterling are both recovering somewhat, the ERG are looking increasingly irrelevant as well as irrational, the cabinet rewrite is looking like a damp squib and R5 no less are debating whether May is dogged or deluded with the majority going for the former. By the end of the week we will have May going off to agree her deal, or something very, very like it with the EU who in turn will be progressing the necessary steps for their agreement.
So is this over? Far from it. It is still very hard to make a case for how May gets this deal through Parliament. Until there is a viable path to this we seem somewhat stuck and the idea of a second referendum is likely to grow in strength. It is also concerning that it is May once again out in front seeking support for her deal with business today. Hammond, Hunt and Javid all still seem to have more important things to do. Is this at her insistence? If so, her cabinet should have overruled her.
Its almost as if every single prominent Tory is putting his/her career above all other considerations.
What have we done to deserve such a bunch of self absorbed creeps?
We reward that type of behaviour. Not the specific of people hiding away to try to preserve their careers when they should be working flat out to sell to MPs and the public a deal that, May at least and officially them as well, believe is necessary in the national interest. Or should be fighting tooth and nail against, believing that to be in the national interest. But that mindset, personal and partisan above everything else, we do reward that and it leads to that.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
That's fine - and though I disagree with the no dealers if they think it would not be that bad, or even good, then of course they should want that option. But there is a not insignificant chance that MPs will find some path through this that avoids no deal, because they (claim to) think it would be a disaster, for the most part. Who knows for sure how they might do that, but a path to remain opens up if there is a push for no deal. No dealers have to accept that risk as part of their push, just as new dealers need to accept they risk no deal.
Both sides may think it worth it, but it also increases the chance of their worst outcome happening.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
Bear in mind, there are ultras who would prefer no Brexit if it's not Brexit on their terms, and on the other side, ultras who would rather have a No Deal Brexit than a Deal, if they can't have Remain.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all. Everyone's fucked off with it and leavers are dying of old age every day at greater than replacement rate.
You're not suggesting that if there's another referendum with a Remain option a Remain win would be a near certainty? Opinion would be highly sensitive in both directions. On the Remain side there could be an army brings in fuel for hospitals story, and on the Leave side there could be a Koln railway station event. Cue unprecedented mental conflict for Daily Mail readers.
Big applause for TM at the CBI. She really went down a storm
It is not the CBI she needs to worry about.
All part of her appeal to the wider public
Yeah, it is not them she needs to appeal to either, it's MPs.
Public opinion matters to mps
Generally, yes. But we're not going to see a shift toward the deal from the public sufficient to get people who have called it a capitulation and humiliation to change their minds. The podcast on the last threat was pretty clear the polling from the public on the deal is brutal. If apocalyptic warnings worked we'd not have voted to leave in the first place, and the deal is far more unpopular than remain ever was, as a sellable thing to the public.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
That's fine - and though I disagree with the no dealers if they think it would not be that bad, or even good, then of course they should want that option. But there is a not insignificant chance that MPs will find some path through this that avoids no deal, because they (claim to) think it would be a disaster, for the most part. Who knows for sure how they might do that, but a path to remain opens up if there is a push for no deal. No dealers have to accept that risk as part of their push, just as new dealers need to accept they risk no deal.
Both sides may think it worth it, but it also increases the chance of their worst outcome happening.
I'm open to hearing why no deal is so bad, the only one I've heard being that the government hasn't prepared for it.
Now if we can't go for no deal purely because of negligence from May then I can see why the Brexiteers in government are incredibly angry.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
There's the other huge bit of nonsense he says too in there....
That is the point I made yesterday at the time. Clueless just does not cut it
However, this lack of understanding of the process is widespread and on all sides and is the reason that the one and only chance to leave the EU will be lost
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
Edit: And as for 'preparing' for no deal, what preparation can you do, other than stockpiling a few days' worth of essentials?
Regardless of how much you like or dislike the Deal, May's had an impossible task.
She's had to try to reconcile a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible, and just plain daft requirements.
All while leading a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible and just plain daft MPs.
She had no chance, really.
It's a pity that Cameron ask himself before offering the referendum, If I am offering the public two choices, do I have the support of enough MP's in my government to be able to deliver the majority needed to deliver what the public asked for, regardless of the option chosen? I think he knew full well that he did not.
And it's a pity May did not ask herself, before triggering Article 50, do I have the support of enough MP's in my government to deliver my vision of what I believe the people voted for? It seems that a year after triggering Article 50 she belatedly realised she did not, which is why she called a GE.
Re the dodgy psychiatrist and @rcs100's comment (fpt):-
"I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often. This was pre-Internet days (well, pre widespread Internet days), and she'd only need her qualifications scrutinised in her first job. If it was a hard pressed hospital looking for a locum for a few weeks, in a psychiatry role, then if she seemed plausible and possessed all the right documents, why would you go to the trouble of calling New Zealand (from phones that probably weren't allowed to dial international)?
And once she's had one role inside the NHS, irrespective of how minor, then people will assume that her qualifications were checked at the start of the process."
It still happens, in financial services. The number of cases of wrong 'un's I have had where there turns out to be something dodgy in their CV or qualifications or what they initially said when they first got the job would fill a long and interesting book. See one Adoboli for instance where we didn't learn anything at trial that couldn't have been known had his CV been checked out properly.
Due diligence pre-employment is still IMO a big weakness for a lot of firms in a lot of sectors.
Let's have a sensible MP from Devon. A Brexiteer. 20,000 majority. Someone who knows the ins and outs of the current Brexit Deal better than May. Respected by Cabinet to tell it how it is. Loved by Conference this year. A true unity candidate.
Let's have a couple of years of Geoffrey Cox, to calm the party and the nation.
(And he's a Cambridge man, so how could TSE object?)
Jeremy Hunt for me.
I’ll win around 16k if it is Hunt.
Being serious though, do you think he would be a good choice even without that reason?
Yes. He’s tough as boots.
Many boots are not very tough. Citation the 'boots theory of socio economic unfairness' of one Samuel Vimes.
I don't see how he gets it though. Not tough enough to quit, not tough enough to put some effort in backing the deal. I know he has the day job but come on.
You are either the Pizza Group or you support May's deal.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
There's the other huge bit of nonsense he says too in there....
That is the point I made yesterday at the time. Clueless just does not cut it
However, this lack of understanding of the process is widespread and on all sides and is the reason that the one and only chance to leave the EU will be lost
I'm not too worried that Corbyn hasn't a clue on the detail. He wouldn't be anywhere near the negotiations if they come to power in a snap election. Starmer will do the work.
Doesn't bode well in general though for a Corbyn administration. I guess almost everything will be delegated for McD to run.
Barnier and team might think they are very clever to have negotiated a deal very much to the disadvantage of the UK but it's not so clever if the Uk is unable to agree it in parliament.
Shadsy trying to get a steer on what odds to offer?
72% reckon under a 100.
Paddys now 2/5 (from 4/9) that May wins a VoNC. void if no vote n 2018. If the letters come in today I think she definitely wins it.
I'd urge care though, if they come in after the vote has been lost (twice) however then she might well lose - particularly if she advocates a second referendum.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
Edit: And as for 'preparing' for no deal, what preparation can you do, other than stockpiling a few days' worth of essentials?
A series of mini, emergency deals might be done e.g. to allow planes to fly etc.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
That's fine - and though I disagree with the no dealers if they think it would not be that bad, or even good, then of course they should want that option. But there is a not insignificant chance that MPs will find some path through this that avoids no deal, because they (claim to) think it would be a disaster, for the most part. Who knows for sure how they might do that, but a path to remain opens up if there is a push for no deal. No dealers have to accept that risk as part of their push, just as new dealers need to accept they risk no deal.
Both sides may think it worth it, but it also increases the chance of their worst outcome happening.
I'm open to hearing why no deal is so bad, the only one I've heard being that the government hasn't prepared for it.
Now if we can't go for no deal purely because of negligence from May then I can see why the Brexiteers in government are incredibly angry.
Being angry is irrelevant. No deal is a default option so if nothing else can be agreed it happens, but no matter how angry no dealers may be, no matter how justified that may be and no matter whether no deal would be just fine, most of the Commons appear to be saying no deal will not be permitted to happen. Ergo something else will be tried. It may be unsuccessful and no deal happens anyway. But if it is successful, what would that be? It could, for instance, be a referendum which ends up saying we remain.
And if that happens, the no dealers will have little cause to complain - they will have been the ones in effect saying no Brexit is better than a bad Brexit.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
These problems could have been solved by preparing for them. So basically no deal is a disaster because they were negligent. Or maybe they did prepare for it and aren't telling us (I refuse to believe even May could be that stupid)
So it looks to Brexiteers that they are trying to bounce us into a crap deal by purposely by making the alternative impossible. And I'm right behind them not standing for it.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
Edit: And as for 'preparing' for no deal, what preparation can you do, other than stockpiling a few days' worth of essentials?
A series of mini, emergency deals might be done e.g. to allow planes to fly etc.
But we are very very short of time.
Yes, they might. But that's still not 'no deal', and we would still have to concede on the EU's red lines, so we'd end up with pretty much exactly what we have now.
" $240-billion-a-day market has announced today that it is to switch London for Amsterdam ahead of Brexit.
CME Group Inc. is moving its European market for short-term financing, the largest in the region, out of London because the exchange operator wants to guarantee continental firms can continue to use it if there is a no-deal Brexit, Bloomberg has reported.
The decision is the first example of an entire major financial market leaving the UK."
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
That's fine - and though I disagree with the no dealers if they think it would not be that bad, or even good, then of course they should want that option. But there is a not insignificant chance that MPs will find some path through this that avoids no deal, because they (claim to) think it would be a disaster, for the most part. Who knows for sure how they might do that, but a path to remain opens up if there is a push for no deal. No dealers have to accept that risk as part of their push, just as new dealers need to accept they risk no deal.
Both sides may think it worth it, but it also increases the chance of their worst outcome happening.
That's it in a nutshell. We need a few folk schooled in Game Theory to cut through this. This currently excludes the ultras on both sides... who can only see the inevitability of their own fundamentalist positions.
Shadsy trying to get a steer on what odds to offer?
72% reckon under a 100.
Paddys now 2/5 (from 4/9) that May wins a VoNC. void if no vote n 2018. If the letters come in today I think she definitely wins it.
I'd urge care though, if they come in after the vote has been lost (twice) however then she might well lose - particularly if she advocates a second referendum.
agreed. that's why I'd take the price today if I was sure the vote would be this week. but any later and i'd want to reassess.
if the letters do come in today what is the timescale for the VoNC? 48 hours?
Shadsy trying to get a steer on what odds to offer?
72% reckon under a 100.
Paddys now 2/5 (from 4/9) that May wins a VoNC. void if no vote n 2018. If the letters come in today I think she definitely wins it.
There's no doubt she would win the vote. The question is how many votes would count as too damaging for her to continue. Mrs Thatcher got 204 out of 370 in 1990 but had to stand down.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
These problems could have been solved by preparing for them. So basically no deal is a disaster because they were negligent. Or maybe they did prepare for it and aren't telling us (I refuse to believe even May could be that stupid)
So it looks to Brexiteers that they are trying to bounce us into a crap deal by purposely by making the alternative impossible. And I'm right behind them not standing for it.
What preparation would you have done that hasn't been done?
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
There's the other huge bit of nonsense he says too in there....
That is the point I made yesterday at the time. Clueless just does not cut it
However, this lack of understanding of the process is widespread and on all sides and is the reason that the one and only chance to leave the EU will be lost
Frightening that someone so thick might soon be in charge.
Re the dodgy psychiatrist and @rcs100's comment (fpt):-
"I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often. This was pre-Internet days (well, pre widespread Internet days), and she'd only need her qualifications scrutinised in her first job. If it was a hard pressed hospital looking for a locum for a few weeks, in a psychiatry role, then if she seemed plausible and possessed all the right documents, why would you go to the trouble of calling New Zealand (from phones that probably weren't allowed to dial international)?
And once she's had one role inside the NHS, irrespective of how minor, then people will assume that her qualifications were checked at the start of the process."
It still happens, in financial services. The number of cases of wrong 'un's I have had where there turns out to be something dodgy in their CV or qualifications or what they initially said when they first got the job would fill a long and interesting book. See one Adoboli for instance where we didn't learn anything at trial that couldn't have been known had his CV been checked out properly.
Due diligence pre-employment is still IMO a big weakness for a lot of firms in a lot of sectors.
In the 1970's I made a job offer to a statistician.
On checking with the Uni we found he had a third class degree not an upper second as claimed.
I would have engaged him if he had initially told the truh about his degree - but as he had been dishonest we withdrew his offer.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
This deal will not pass the HoC. It's now clearly a choice of no deal or no Brexit.
If it boils down to that, it will be No-Brexit. The HoC will never allow No-deal.
There is a 3rd way. The so-called TARP strategy. The HoC votes it down. The markets go into utter meltdown and the pound tanks, forcing food prices rises within days. Front pages full of warnings of disaster. Army announces it is on standby etc etc.
MPs panic.
May puts vote back again to HoC and scrapes through, as faced with the abyss, enough MPs fold.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
These problems could have been solved by preparing for them. So basically no deal is a disaster because they were negligent. Or maybe they did prepare for it and aren't telling us (I refuse to believe even May could be that stupid)
So it looks to Brexiteers that they are trying to bounce us into a crap deal by purposely by making the alternative impossible. And I'm right behind them not standing for it.
But the alternatve 'is' impossible. There will be enough Tory MPs and Labour MPs to block it.
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
This deal will not pass the HoC. It's now clearly a choice of no deal or no Brexit.
If it boils down to that, it will be No-Brexit. The HoC will never allow No-deal.
There is a 3rd way. The so-called TARP strategy. The HoC votes it down. The markets go into utter meltdown and the pound tanks, forcing food prices rises within days. Front pages full of warnings of disaster. Army announces it is on standby etc etc.
MPs panic.
May puts vote back again to HoC and scrapes through, as faced with the abyss, enough MPs fold.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
Edit: And as for 'preparing' for no deal, what preparation can you do, other than stockpiling a few days' worth of essentials?
A series of mini, emergency deals might be done e.g. to allow planes to fly etc.
But we are very very short of time.
We just don't have time.
Only way is extending Article 50 - can it be done? Does it have to pass through the HoC? The EU will be responsive to such a request.
The ERG need to ask their members to pull back all their letters and go with Mickey Fab's plan. It puts far more pressure on the PM to bend toward their will after the (presumably lost) first vote than this ragtag plan they have right now.
I'm open to hearing why no deal is so bad, the only one I've heard being that the government hasn't prepared for it.
Now if we can't go for no deal purely because of negligence from May then I can see why the Brexiteers in government are incredibly angry.
I thought it included: - JIT supply chains relying on rapid and frictionless movement of parts and goods around the Single Market would be badly disrupted, with snowballing effects in all sorts of areas. This includes food to supermarkets and medical supplies. - Lack of agreement on proof of product standards impairing all aspects on import and export (and given that we have one of the most open economies in the world at this point, this could be pretty damn bad). With this and the first one, medical supplies are made across the continent to the same standards, examined, underwritten, moved freely to where they are needed, allowing for specialisation to improve quality, research, and availability at lower cost to the needy. How do medical supply qualities get underwritten going forwards? - Massive jams at Dover and other ports as checks on goods being transported would become 100% instead of a small sample; with the number of lorries going through per day, a 2 minute per lorry delay equates to turning the M26 and M20 into car parks very swiftly. - We're in a common energy market and can get up to 25% of our energy from the continent. With no agreement, what happens next? - About two hundred or so international agreements that relied on us being part of the EU becoming immediately invalid with no transition or re-agreement - Loss of import/export capabilities highly likely to cause sterling crash, feeding through to significant price increases to many things. - The above highly likely to cause a recession, which, as we're still in deficit from the last one, would re-trigger austerity again. - Loss of confidence causing foreign investment to crater, exacerbating all of the above.
The denizens of Mumsnet have themselves worked up about food shortages following a no-deal Brexit, but surely all the problems at the border will be for UK exports, not imports?
I can't imagine any UK government causing food shortages by imposing border checks on food imports.
Am I missing anything? (I'm assuming that only a very small proportion of food imports travel by air)
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
There's the other huge bit of nonsense he says too in there....
That is the point I made yesterday at the time. Clueless just does not cut it
However, this lack of understanding of the process is widespread and on all sides and is the reason that the one and only chance to leave the EU will be lost
Frightening that someone so thick might soon be in charge.
He will blend in with all the other thick people we elect.....
Listening to TM at the CBI and her detailed knowledge on Brexit leaves all else trailing by a mountain mile
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
This deal will not pass the HoC. It's now clearly a choice of no deal or no Brexit.
If it boils down to that, it will be No-Brexit. The HoC will never allow No-deal.
There is a 3rd way. The so-called TARP strategy. The HoC votes it down. The markets go into utter meltdown and the pound tanks, forcing food prices rises within days. Front pages full of warnings of disaster. Army announces it is on standby etc etc.
MPs panic.
May puts vote back again to HoC and scrapes through, as faced with the abyss, enough MPs fold.
Or, May resigns, forced GE, Corbyn gets into power, repackages the deal as 'labour's deal' it's exactly the same, and then is in control of the Brexit full negioation.
I cannot see a way where the ERG get a 'Brexiteer' as a leader, but remain in power.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
That's fine - and though I disagree with the no dealers if they think it would not be that bad, or even good, then of course they should want that option. But there is a not insignificant chance that MPs will find some path through this that avoids no deal, because they (claim to) think it would be a disaster, for the most part. Who knows for sure how they might do that, but a path to remain opens up if there is a push for no deal. No dealers have to accept that risk as part of their push, just as new dealers need to accept they risk no deal.
Both sides may think it worth it, but it also increases the chance of their worst outcome happening.
I'm open to hearing why no deal is so bad, the only one I've heard being that the government hasn't prepared for it.
Now if we can't go for no deal purely because of negligence from May then I can see why the Brexiteers in government are incredibly angry.
May and Hammond betwen them have refused to make provision for a properly prepared No Deal option. Incredibly stupid because either 1) the EU are concerned about a No Deal Brexit happening and it would have given you some negotiating leverage or 2) the EU really don't give a toss, in which case you would be prepared for it as an outcome if you come back with the wanky "take it or die" deal May and Robbins have managed to negotiate. And can't then get that through the House.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, it's been explained zillions of times. No deal (which is largely unrelated to whether we transition to WTO terms) means what it says. There would be no legal framework for flying aeroplanes, or selling agricultural products to the EU, or selling medicines to the EU, or unwinding trillions of euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
These problems could have been solved by preparing for them. So basically no deal is a disaster because they were negligent. Or maybe they did prepare for it and aren't telling us (I refuse to believe even May could be that stupid)
So it looks to Brexiteers that they are trying to bounce us into a crap deal by purposely by making the alternative impossible. And I'm right behind them not standing for it.
Er, why would anyone want to bounce us into a crap deal? What would be the point? Who would it benefit?
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
There's the other huge bit of nonsense he says too in there....
That is the point I made yesterday at the time. Clueless just does not cut it
However, this lack of understanding of the process is widespread and on all sides and is the reason that the one and only chance to leave the EU will be lost
I'm not too worried that Corbyn hasn't a clue on the detail. He wouldn't be anywhere near the negotiations if they come to power in a snap election. Starmer will do the work.
Doesn't bode well in general though for a Corbyn administration. I guess almost everything will be delegated for McD to run.
Yes but Starmer is saying exactly the same as Corbyn
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
There's the other huge bit of nonsense he says too in there....
That is the point I made yesterday at the time. Clueless just does not cut it
However, this lack of understanding of the process is widespread and on all sides and is the reason that the one and only chance to leave the EU will be lost
I'm not too worried that Corbyn hasn't a clue on the detail. He wouldn't be anywhere near the negotiations if they come to power in a snap election. Starmer will do the work.
Doesn't bode well in general though for a Corbyn administration. I guess almost everything will be delegated for McD to run.
Corbyn isn't going to be doing much of anything when he's PM. They'll just give him a scale model of Dawson's Field and some toy aircraft to play with while McD leads the way.
I'll say this for no dealers - they presumably believe no deal is a good thing, and that is why they will vote down this or any deal.
They also realise that if this drags on much longer they aren't going to get any Brexit at all.
That I don't think all of the no dealers have realised If they do and can accept that, well done. If they don't realise that they are perhaps going to be in for a big shock, though it is not certain yet. I wonder if they will look back more fondly on this Brexit deal if we remain, crap though it is.
I don't like the current deal and I definitely don't want to remain, so I'm leaning towards no deal.
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
C'mon, i euros worth of derivative contracts, and we wouldn't even be able to trade without disruption to non-EU countries. By default there would also be economy-killing delays at Calais and probably therefore Dover.
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
These problems could have been solved by preparing for them. So basically no deal is a disaster because they were negligent. Or maybe they did prepare for it and aren't telling us (I refuse to believe even May could be that stupid)
So it looks to Brexiteers that they are trying to bounce us into a crap deal by purposely by making the alternative impossible. And I'm right behind them not standing for it.
So...even if it is a disaster and the alternative is not, we should choose disaster because the people framing the choice for the alternative outmaneuvered the other side and that's not fair?
I'd rather people back no deal because they don't think it would be a disaster, rightly or wrongly, than choosing disaster because how dare those meanies push for another option.
If the government has unnecessarily brought us to the brink of disaster with their tactics, I don't know that a sensible solution is to accept the disaster out of petulance at their incompetence, rather than take the non-disaster route and castigate all those involved accordingly.
If one doesn't think the other option is non-disaster that is different.
Comments
Cable cars, garden bridges, stadiums, bikes, buses and his own staff costs - Johnson's record is there for all to see.
First preference was Remain 32%, Leave with No Deal 24%, Leave with Deal 21%. If Leave with Deal managed to edge into second place in a referendum, then I expect it would win quite easily on transfers.
Hermann von Rompuy was on Radio 4 this morning talking a lot of sense and saying that Britain really needed to focus on the FTA which they wanted to have with the EU and which the EU also wanted to have, not the transition which was the way to get from where we are now to there in a calm and orderly manner. Why our God-awful MPs can't see this I don't know. Or rather I do. They too are morons.
EDIT: Overheard a Leave voter in the pub last night. Did nothing to disabuse me of the notion that some of them struggle to count to 48...
She fulfils most of the brexit requirements and these ultras threaten leaving for their pure ideology
It would be the irony of all ironies if ERG take down the deal and then find brexit taken from them by the HOC as a second referendum becomes inevitable
But the truth is that imho at least some of them don't really want a deal. They want to carry on arguing and causing chaos and trouble for a few more years. It is all just a game to some.
As for the stadium, the essential question is what should have happened? The idea of a stand-alone athletics stadium of that size is nonsense and the only sport which can support arenas of that size in the UK is soccer. Now, there may be a discussion on terms but it is clear that soccer teams are willing to finance their own grounds so it's not as if it is a no-choice discussion.
Corbyn really did sound like the less scrupulous leave campaign slogans there. Insisting because we think it is in the EU's interest that they will give us what we want. You could even try to argue being overly optimistic might just be justified prior to commencement of negotiations, but as people rightly pointed out and some of us(such as me) did not listen hard enough at the time, the EU plays rough and tough and we have seen that.
She's had to try to reconcile a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible, and just plain daft requirements.
All while leading a bunch of incoherent, inconsistent, unrealistic, implausible and just plain daft MPs.
She had no chance, really.
I think that article overplays its hand.
it shows that in 2016/17 the cost was £17m and the number of journeys was 11m, so half the long run subsidy.
I think you can see from the operating figures what the trend looks like; City Hall needs more years like 2016/17 and it will get there.
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/santander-cycles-transparency-to-end-of-december-2017.pdf
It also implies capital costs of ~£13m in the year which sounds like work expanding the scheme to me (I'm not clear on whether the cost of replacing lost or stolen bikes is an operating cost - I think it should be)
I will throw my prediction in again. Javid would break a taboo in the Tory party both with his ethnic background but also where he comes from. Go and look at the area of Bristol he grew up in Google streetview.
It's certainly not persuading anyone to change their minds.
And I doubt that was Boris's fault, but Ken's mayoral regime and Labour, who initiated the Olympics project.
I would have hoped the lessons of the Millennium Dome's troubled first decade to have been learned, but apparently not.
I don't want to defend Boris totally: the Garden Bridge was a hideous idea, incredibly poorly and (IMO) corruptly implemented.
The PM chose not to press for that one
https://twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1064268519393640450
Everyone says that it will be the end of the world, but no one seems to explain why exactly. We heard the exact same warnings if we even voted to leave or not join the Euro so I'm sceptical of claims like that.
The problem is the failure of people to compromise: some remainers, but mostly the hardcore Brexiteers. And also of many Brexiteers to admit the mistakes *they* made that has led to this. Instead they'd rather blame anyone else (as long as that 'anyone' is a remainer).
It's pathetic.
I'd also keep a certain amount if disdain for those in other political parties, who are willing to see the deal go down, and all the chaos that will entail, because they think it will be good for their party.
Both sides may think it worth it, but it also increases the chance of their worst outcome happening.
Now if we can't go for no deal purely because of negligence from May then I can see why the Brexiteers in government are incredibly angry.
However, this lack of understanding of the process is widespread and on all sides and is the reason that the one and only chance to leave the EU will be lost
Now, it may well be that faced with such unmitigated disaster for both sides, we could do a deal with the EU to get round these problems. But that is not 'no deal', it's a deal, and there's no reason to suppose it would look very different to the withdrawal deal on the table.
Edit: And as for 'preparing' for no deal, what preparation can you do, other than stockpiling a few days' worth of essentials?
It's a pity that Cameron ask himself before offering the referendum, If I am offering the public two choices, do I have the support of enough MP's in my government to be able to deliver the majority needed to deliver what the public asked for, regardless of the option chosen? I think he knew full well that he did not.
And it's a pity May did not ask herself, before triggering Article 50, do I have the support of enough MP's in my government to deliver my vision of what I believe the people voted for? It seems that a year after triggering Article 50 she belatedly realised she did not, which is why she called a GE.
"I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often. This was pre-Internet days (well, pre widespread Internet days), and she'd only need her qualifications scrutinised in her first job. If it was a hard pressed hospital looking for a locum for a few weeks, in a psychiatry role, then if she seemed plausible and possessed all the right documents, why would you go to the trouble of calling New Zealand (from phones that probably weren't allowed to dial international)?
And once she's had one role inside the NHS, irrespective of how minor, then people will assume that her qualifications were checked at the start of the process."
It still happens, in financial services. The number of cases of wrong 'un's I have had where there turns out to be something dodgy in their CV or qualifications or what they initially said when they first got the job would fill a long and interesting book. See one Adoboli for instance where we didn't learn anything at trial that couldn't have been known had his CV been checked out properly.
Due diligence pre-employment is still IMO a big weakness for a lot of firms in a lot of sectors.
Doesn't bode well in general though for a Corbyn administration. I guess almost everything will be delegated for McD to run.
But we are very very short of time.
And if that happens, the no dealers will have little cause to complain - they will have been the ones in effect saying no Brexit is better than a bad Brexit.
It is nearly lunchtime and still they only have 47.99999999 letters.
So it looks to Brexiteers that they are trying to bounce us into a crap deal by purposely by making the alternative impossible. And I'm right behind them not standing for it.
CME Group Inc. is moving its European market for short-term financing, the largest in the region, out of London because the exchange operator wants to guarantee continental firms can continue to use it if there is a no-deal Brexit, Bloomberg has reported.
The decision is the first example of an entire major financial market leaving the UK."
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/240-billion-a-day-market-set-to-move-out-of-london-ahead-of-brexit/07/11/
if the letters do come in today what is the timescale for the VoNC? 48 hours?
On checking with the Uni we found he had a third class degree not an upper second as claimed.
I would have engaged him if he had initially told the truh about his degree - but as he had been dishonest we withdrew his offer.
MPs panic.
May puts vote back again to HoC and scrapes through, as faced with the abyss, enough MPs fold.
Only way is extending Article 50 - can it be done? Does it have to pass through the HoC? The EU will be responsive to such a request.
- JIT supply chains relying on rapid and frictionless movement of parts and goods around the Single Market would be badly disrupted, with snowballing effects in all sorts of areas. This includes food to supermarkets and medical supplies.
- Lack of agreement on proof of product standards impairing all aspects on import and export (and given that we have one of the most open economies in the world at this point, this could be pretty damn bad). With this and the first one, medical supplies are made across the continent to the same standards, examined, underwritten, moved freely to where they are needed, allowing for specialisation to improve quality, research, and availability at lower cost to the needy. How do medical supply qualities get underwritten going forwards?
- Massive jams at Dover and other ports as checks on goods being transported would become 100% instead of a small sample; with the number of lorries going through per day, a 2 minute per lorry delay equates to turning the M26 and M20 into car parks very swiftly.
- We're in a common energy market and can get up to 25% of our energy from the continent. With no agreement, what happens next?
- About two hundred or so international agreements that relied on us being part of the EU becoming immediately invalid with no transition or re-agreement
- Loss of import/export capabilities highly likely to cause sterling crash, feeding through to significant price increases to many things.
- The above highly likely to cause a recession, which, as we're still in deficit from the last one, would re-trigger austerity again.
- Loss of confidence causing foreign investment to crater, exacerbating all of the above.
That and more, really.
I can't imagine any UK government causing food shortages by imposing border checks on food imports.
Am I missing anything? (I'm assuming that only a very small proportion of food imports travel by air)
I cannot see a way where the ERG get a 'Brexiteer' as a leader, but remain in power.
it rapidly starts to look like a dead duck of a coup attempt
I'd rather people back no deal because they don't think it would be a disaster, rightly or wrongly, than choosing disaster because how dare those meanies push for another option.
If the government has unnecessarily brought us to the brink of disaster with their tactics, I don't know that a sensible solution is to accept the disaster out of petulance at their incompetence, rather than take the non-disaster route and castigate all those involved accordingly.
If one doesn't think the other option is non-disaster that is different.