I'd enjoy it! It is also far more sensible than an unstable hybrid version. Tell the EU we are having a referendum on those choices, after the referendum 2 years to implement the result. Incentive to them to get us fully on board or to be rid of a recalcitrant member.
Is your business export based at all ? From my business PoV joining the Euro would only leave USD currency risk for us.
Partly, yes. We also import from EU.
Where there is a currency risk there is also an opportunity. Over the years we have made money from the sterling / euro exchange rather than a loss. I don't object to trading with a different currency.
I'd enjoy it! It is also far more sensible than an unstable hybrid version. Tell the EU we are having a referendum on those choices, after the referendum 2 years to implement the result. Incentive to them to get us fully on board or to be rid of a recalcitrant member.
Is your business export based at all ? From my business PoV joining the Euro would only leave USD currency risk for us.
You can easily hedge dollar and euro currencies if the need to lock in an exchange rate is an issue for you.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
Trouble is I don't want him to move from DEFRA where he is starting to make a real difference. I can see all his good work being swept away by another Environment Secretary who cares only for short termism and keeping the farmers happy.
Even if we have a soft Norway+ Brexit we will still be leaving the CAP and CFP so it's the one place we need one of our more talented ministers
With things like insect die off and soil depletion it is certainly one of the most important areas of Government at the moment. And an area where there are clear benefits from leaving the EU after their decades of mismanagement.
I'd enjoy it! It is also far more sensible than an unstable hybrid version. Tell the EU we are having a referendum on those choices, after the referendum 2 years to implement the result. Incentive to them to get us fully on board or to be rid of a recalcitrant member.
Is your business export based at all ? From my business PoV joining the Euro would only leave USD currency risk for us.
You can easily hedge dollar and euro currencies if the need to lock in an exchange rate is an issue for you.
Lol all you do in the long run with that is pay the bank.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
There was an increase in the oil price from $3 to $12 a barrel in 1973 which caused a global economic crisis.
But, it was made worse by the Barber Boom of 1972/1973.
I'd enjoy it! It is also far more sensible than an unstable hybrid version. Tell the EU we are having a referendum on those choices, after the referendum 2 years to implement the result. Incentive to them to get us fully on board or to be rid of a recalcitrant member.
Is your business export based at all ? From my business PoV joining the Euro would only leave USD currency risk for us.
You can easily hedge dollar and euro currencies if the need to lock in an exchange rate is an issue for you.
Lol all you do in the long run with that is pay the bank.
The only cohort that actually wants this deal is Con remainers- which aligns with the only people in this place which supports the deal being Con remainers.
Interesting that May has stopped calling Con remainers "saboteurs" now they're the only people supporting her deal.
I'm a Leaver, and I support it.
It's funny, you and Richard Nabavi are both reluctant dealers, and you both seem to support it for the same reasons, though approaching from two completely different angles.
Brexit is Brexit.
It's not my preferred Imperial Full English Brexit where we leave with all our Angevin possessions restored, but them's the breaks.
I'd enjoy it! It is also far more sensible than an unstable hybrid version. Tell the EU we are having a referendum on those choices, after the referendum 2 years to implement the result. Incentive to them to get us fully on board or to be rid of a recalcitrant member.
Is your business export based at all ? From my business PoV joining the Euro would only leave USD currency risk for us.
Partly, yes. We also import from EU.
Where there is a currency risk there is also an opportunity. Over the years we have made money from the sterling / euro exchange rather than a loss. I don't object to trading with a different currency.
Same for us. The pre-referendum exchange rate of 1.4 was painful, some welcome relief when Art 50 was triggered
Tbf to Williamson (an unnatural position for me), an HMS Glasgow T26 is already under construction. Can't walk down the Govan Rd without some horny handed son of toil stopping me to tell of the honour done to the “important role Scotland plays in shipbuilding and the national security of our country”.
You could not make up how thick these Tories are.
You not having a go at me on such a lovely morning are you Malc ?
G you are an honourable exception to the norm, the biggest donkeys seem to get to Westminster as well.
I think there’s a sort of entire worldview thing going on with some of the views on a fresh referendum.
There’s the one where it’s like a sport, or game. “Why should they have two bites of the cherry? We won, we get the spoils, they have to suck it up.”
There’s the one where it’s like consulting someone on what they should do in the future. “Are you sure of this? Have you changed your mind?”
If you view it as an adversarial contest, divided into them-and-us (and supporters of each), then it’s manifestly unfair that the losers get a rematch before you get to enjoy your trophy/winnings/spoils (delete as applicable). You would also assume by default that if the losers were convinced they’d lose again, they’d not even want to take the field. And, as they are “them”, they’ll obviously try some other underhanded cheating tactics to deprive you of your hard won victory. In this worldview, winning is the important thing, and reconciling with the losers is all-but-irrelevant (and probably impossible in any case). Asking the same question again (or even asking a question where one of the answers could overturn the outcome of the previous game vote is downright unfair. Totally unacceptable.
If you view it as consulting the people on what they think is best for the country, then there’s no issue whatsoever with that. Even asking the exact same question again. If it was a loved one of yours, you’d do it all the time:
“Are you sure you want to go through with this?” -vs- “No, you decided you’d have a tattoo. The only choice you have left is which one”, or “Nope, you chose that guy, you have to marry him, I don’t care if he beats you now, just choose what flowers you want for the wedding”, or “No, you said you’d jump off the bridge, you can only change your mind after jumping, your only choice is head-first or feet-first”
If this is as important as marrying someone, getting a tattoo, choosing a college or career, jumping off a bridge, or whatever, then I see no issues with asking the public to confirm they really want to go ahead.
Then again, I was never that invested in the EU either way (I was always a soft Eurosceptic), and I disliked both campaigns cordially last time.
That is a very long way of saying we should keep asking the same question until we get the answer we want.
I expect that what Anna Soubry, Sarah Wollaston et al really want is a choice between 1. Remain, 2 Remain and join the Euro.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Considering May will have already gifted them Northern Ireland and money, the negotiators will really struggle don't you agree?
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
Trouble is I don't want him to move from DEFRA where he is starting to make a real difference. I can see all his good work being swept away by another Environment Secretary who cares only for short termism and keeping the farmers happy.
Even if we have a soft Norway+ Brexit we will still be leaving the CAP and CFP so it's the one place we need one of our more talented ministers
LOL, who in that lot of turnips could you possibly say has any talent whatsoever.
I'd enjoy it! It is also far more sensible than an unstable hybrid version. Tell the EU we are having a referendum on those choices, after the referendum 2 years to implement the result. Incentive to them to get us fully on board or to be rid of a recalcitrant member.
Is your business export based at all ? From my business PoV joining the Euro would only leave USD currency risk for us.
You can easily hedge dollar and euro currencies if the need to lock in an exchange rate is an issue for you.
Lol all you do in the long run with that is pay the bank.
Isn't that all that banks are for?
Yes but its best to try and pay them as little as possible. "Hedging" can leave you feeling very sick in certain situations too; and there is always the fact that banks make a little money on conversions. Obviously there are MANY other issues and issues but eliminating currency risk (and reward) from a strictly business PoV would be a good thing.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
There was an increase in the oil price from $3 to $12 a barrel in 1973 which caused a global economic crisis.
Agreed ,there was a global economic banking crisis in 2008.
Does not stop the opposition at the time blaming it all on the government of the day.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
There was an increase in the oil price from $3 to $12 a barrel in 1973 which caused a global economic crisis.
But, it was made worse by the Barber Boom of 1972/1973.
True , my father at the time was a house builder. He sat at home that year as the land he bought to build houses doubled in value. So he made more money just waiting , rather than constructing new houses.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
Very true, big g seems to be losing it. Gove and his wife are the most untrustworthy sycophants you could imagine.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
There are much bigger liars and backstabbers in the Tory Party than Gove.
From 45 to 847....at that rate Scotland will be empty in about 5,300 years.....except there are over three times as many becoming British in Scotland....Phew! Had me worried....
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
If it were that easy, the government would do it.
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
There are much bigger liars and backstabbers in the Tory Party than Gove.
LOL, it is only a stiletto here and there, he is among the top rung of them for sure.
From 45 to 847....at that rate Scotland will be empty in about 5,300 years.....except there are over three times as many becoming British in Scotland....Phew! Had me worried....
LOL, what kind of numpty becomes British, which country is that again.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
He is top of the pops in my animal loving, recycling and vegan family and grand children
As for the rest show me a politician who is not. And I do not drink, not even sherry or whisky
There have been very few occasions when Gove has made a decisive public betrayal, and off the top of my head, they were all justified and for a good cause.
Holing Boris's nascent leadership bid below the waterline, for example.
His disloyalty to David Cameron over the referendum I feel was also justified. Cameron was being cynical, Gove was a genuine optimist.
Despite the fact that Gove and May don't actually like each other much, Gove has probably done more to hold May's cabinet together than any other- and all over a deal he clearly will not like very much.
If he's disloyal to May he's an odd way of showing it.
(Of course today is the day he'll chose to resign, make me look like an idiot)
Funnily enough I had Irish Grandparents on my father's side so could indeed if I wished. However as we will be independent soon it is not worth the hassle.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
Far from it - Tory Governments have usually bequeathed an economic mess which Labour had to clear up. In October 1964 Labour inherited a huge Balance of Payments deficit , and the outgoing Tory Chancellor - Reggie Maudling - apologised to his successor - James Callaghan - for 'having left things in such a mess.'In June 1970 Labour passed on a strong Balance of Payments - and a Budget Surplus - to Ted Heath. No Tory Government has managed to do either. Moreover, Thatcher's inheritance in May 1979 was far more benign than that enjoyed by Wilson in March 1974 - inflation was lower, the Balance of Payments was healthier as were the Public Finances.
The only cohort that actually wants this deal is Con remainers- which aligns with the only people in this place which supports the deal being Con remainers.
Interesting that May has stopped calling Con remainers "saboteurs" now they're the only people supporting her deal.
I'm a Leaver, and I support it.
It's funny, you and Richard Nabavi are both reluctant dealers, and you both seem to support it for the same reasons, though approaching from two completely different angles.
It isn't actually a deal in the sense of determining the end state. People read into what they want. We're still in cake and eat it territory. The main negotiation is still to come. It could go any direction, but I suspect we will end up in the Vassal State.
Funnily enough I had Irish Grandparents on my father's side so could indeed if I wished. However as we will be independent soon it is not worth the hassle.
One presumes that the Kingdom of Scotland intends to remain part of the common travel area with the RoI and rUK, so it's probably a moot point.
Unless somebody intends to get Barnier and Varadkar's fence building firm off to wall off Scotland once they're done with Ireland.
There have been very few occasions when Gove has made a decisive public betrayal, and off the top of my head, they were all justified and for a good cause.
Holing Boris's nascent leadership bid below the waterline, for example.
His disloyalty to David Cameron over the referendum I feel was also justified. Cameron was being cynical, Gove was a genuine optimist.
Despite the fact that Gove and May don't actually like each other much, Gove has probably done more to hold May's cabinet together than any other- and all over a deal he clearly will not like very much.
If he's disloyal to May he's an odd way of showing it.
(Of course today is the day he'll chose to resign, make me look like an idiot)
Terminating Boris Johnson's leadership bid was certainly in the national interest.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
I did not say that about business and I have opposed ERG and Boris ever since
Capping fares means someone else pays for it, usually the tax payer
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
If it were that easy, the government would do it.
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
I wish we'd use the right word. It's inequality, not austerity.
A budget deficit of that size needs to be addressed by increased taxation.
But post Thatcher governments believe in flat taxes, i.e. the rich must pay no more than the poor.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
If it were that easy, the government would do it.
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
I wish we'd use the right word. It's inequality, not austerity.
A budget deficit of that size needs to be addressed by increased taxation.
But post Thatcher governments believe in flat taxes, i.e. the rich must pay no more than the poor.
There has been increased taxation on the wealthiest 10% since 2010. And, they pay far more than the poor.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
If it were that easy, the government would do it.
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
I wish we'd use the right word. It's inequality, not austerity.
A budget deficit of that size needs to be addressed by increased taxation.
But post Thatcher governments believe in flat taxes, i.e. the rich must pay no more than the poor.
Do you really believe that the rich pay no more than the poor?
US government has charged the British technology entrepreneur Mike Lynch with fraud over the sale of his software company Autonomy to Hewlett Packard in 2011.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
If it were that easy, the government would do it.
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
I wish we'd use the right word. It's inequality, not austerity.
A budget deficit of that size needs to be addressed by increased taxation.
But post Thatcher governments believe in flat taxes, i.e. the rich must pay no more than the poor.
Do you really believe that the rich pay no more than the poor?
You get tax exiles, but by and large, the rich pay a lot of tax.
There have been very few occasions when Gove has made a decisive public betrayal, and off the top of my head, they were all justified and for a good cause.
Holing Boris's nascent leadership bid below the waterline, for example.
His disloyalty to David Cameron over the referendum I feel was also justified. Cameron was being cynical, Gove was a genuine optimist.
Despite the fact that Gove and May don't actually like each other much, Gove has probably done more to hold May's cabinet together than any other- and all over a deal he clearly will not like very much.
If he's disloyal to May he's an odd way of showing it.
(Of course today is the day he'll chose to resign, make me look like an idiot)
Terminating Boris Johnson's leadership bid was certainly in the national interest.
US government has charged the British technology entrepreneur Mike Lynch with fraud over the sale of his software company Autonomy to Hewlett Packard in 2011.
One of the worst acquisitions in corporate history. Nearly killed HP, and what survived is but a husk of a once proud beast.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
If it were that easy, the government would do it.
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
I wish we'd use the right word. It's inequality, not austerity.
A budget deficit of that size needs to be addressed by increased taxation.
But post Thatcher governments believe in flat taxes, i.e. the rich must pay no more than the poor.
Do you really believe that the rich pay no more than the poor?
You get tax exiles, but by and large, the rich pay a lot of tax.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
Unlike American Presidents, she isn't able to go on TV to do an 'address to the nation'. I don't know whether she even has that right, or not, but it would be a precedent she couldn't set (outside wartime). If she does a lunchtime press conference it will be watched only by journalists and PB'ers and then filtered through the media and miss most ordinary people. No-one watches PPBs any more; indeed I haven't seen one myself since 2017. Offering a debate with Corbyn is the only way she gets herself an unedited showing on evening weekend TV.
So she has something to announce during the debate, and the audience isn't really the public, but MPs, and specifically her own MPs (edit/ or perhaps she really does think Labour's are less idiotic than hers). It will be something sufficiently dramatic to influence their vote, and need to be said publicly so they have nowhere to hide. Which can only be to spell out what the government will do, in the event that her deal is voted down, and it will be something her MPs won't like.
That simply is not true. Back in the 1960s &1970s it was normal practice for the PM to address the nation via a Ministerial Broadcast. Harold Wilson did so quite regularly in relation to economic issues - including Devaluation in November 1967 - and Rhodesia. Ted Heath did so in relation to the 1972 Miners' strike and the Three-Day week at the end of 1973. Eden did so in relation to Suez in late 1956. Opposition Leaders had the right of reply.
US government has charged the British technology entrepreneur Mike Lynch with fraud over the sale of his software company Autonomy to Hewlett Packard in 2011.
One of the worst acquisitions in corporate history. Nearly killed HP, and what survived is but a husk of a once proud beast.
A completely oddly handled purchase though, the two companies had wildly different management structures and HP purchased Autonomy for a 79% premium on its market value.
That simply is not true. Back in the 1960s &1970s it was normal practice for the PM to address the nation via a Ministerial Broadcast. Harold Wilson did so quite regularly in relation to economic issues - including Devaluation in November 1967 - and Rhodesia. Ted Heath did so in relation to the 1972 Miners' strike and the Three-Day week at the end of 1973. Eden did so in relation to Suez in late 1956. Opposition Leaders had the right of reply.
It's generally considered in very poor form to address the public before you've addressed Parliament. But that's more a convention and a courtesy, rather than a hard and fast rule.
Once you've addressed Parliament, knock yourself out.
US government has charged the British technology entrepreneur Mike Lynch with fraud over the sale of his software company Autonomy to Hewlett Packard in 2011.
One of the worst acquisitions in corporate history. Nearly killed HP, and what survived is but a husk of a once proud beast.
A completely oddly handled purchase though, the two companies had wildly different management structures and HP purchased Autonomy for a 79% premium on its market value.
The DOJ has (very belatedly) decided it thinks it was malice rather than incompetence. But I think the DOJ will be on a very sticky wicket trying to prove it.
In all honesty, I think it would solve a lot of problems if we just banned Russian men ages 16-60 from everywhere.
Especially cathedral cities and pro-Trump social media.
In one of the Len Deighton spy novels a Pole said of a KGB officer, "you'd think they wouldn't go where they are not wanted". The reply was, "That would severely restrict their freedom of movement."
That simply is not true. Back in the 1960s &1970s it was normal practice for the PM to address the nation via a Ministerial Broadcast. Harold Wilson did so quite regularly in relation to economic issues - including Devaluation in November 1967 - and Rhodesia. Ted Heath did so in relation to the 1972 Miners' strike and the Three-Day week at the end of 1973. Eden did so in relation to Suez in late 1956. Opposition Leaders had the right of reply.
It's generally considered in very poor form to address the public before you've addressed Parliament. But that's more a convention and a courtesy, rather than a hard and fast rule.
Once you've addressed Parliament, knock yourself out.
She has addressed Parliament, repeatedly. She faced hours of questioning in Parliament the other day.
There have been very few occasions when Gove has made a decisive public betrayal, and off the top of my head, they were all justified and for a good cause.
Holing Boris's nascent leadership bid below the waterline, for example.
His disloyalty to David Cameron over the referendum I feel was also justified. Cameron was being cynical, Gove was a genuine optimist.
Despite the fact that Gove and May don't actually like each other much, Gove has probably done more to hold May's cabinet together than any other- and all over a deal he clearly will not like very much.
If he's disloyal to May he's an odd way of showing it.
(Of course today is the day he'll chose to resign, make me look like an idiot)
Terminating Boris Johnson's leadership bid was certainly in the national interest.
There have been very few occasions when Gove has made a decisive public betrayal, and off the top of my head, they were all justified and for a good cause.
Holing Boris's nascent leadership bid below the waterline, for example.
His disloyalty to David Cameron over the referendum I feel was also justified. Cameron was being cynical, Gove was a genuine optimist.
Despite the fact that Gove and May don't actually like each other much, Gove has probably done more to hold May's cabinet together than any other- and all over a deal he clearly will not like very much.
If he's disloyal to May he's an odd way of showing it.
(Of course today is the day he'll chose to resign, make me look like an idiot)
Terminating Boris Johnson's leadership bid was certainly in the national interest.
In hindsight I no longer agree.
Johnson with Gove behind him doing the legwork (like Blair with Brown behind him when the two could work together) could have achieved more than May in this process.
On the day rail fare increases of 3.1% are announced Sadiq Khan and TFL are starring at a one billion pound loss
He has frozen fares until 2020, handed 18,000 staff a 3.5% wage increase, banned advertising in an act of political correctness, seen a fall in passenger numbers and has encountered problems with crossrail
I think we have labour policy in transparency right there. Labour always leaves the country in a financial mess and the conservatives have to clear it up.
I thought you had a good memory ?
Roy Jenkins in 1970 , left the economy in a better state, than the Conservatives gave us in 1974. Never mind , never let your Daily Mail facts get in way of the truth.
That's not very kind. Do you agree freezing fares and increasing wages for staff is unsustainable
I know that austerity isn't sustainable which is why instead of fixing things as you claim the Tories have doubled the national debt whilst cutting front line services to crisis point.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
If it were that easy, the government would do it.
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
I wish we'd use the right word. It's inequality, not austerity.
A budget deficit of that size needs to be addressed by increased taxation.
But post Thatcher governments believe in flat taxes, i.e. the rich must pay no more than the poor.
What has been missing is investment - by the government and by industry. Borrow money - interest rates have been at ludicrous loss making borrowing cheap. Invest in things like infrastructure which pay a return on investment. Reap the increased tax take from more people in jobs that pay actual dates, from people having disposable income to spend.
Borrow. Invest. Make a return on the investment. Simple economics which the Tories chose to bin - because borrowing is communism or something. Instead they have slashed spending in a way designed to slow economic output increase the cost of living and supress wages. Almost a billion pounds of additional debt and not a thing to show for it.
Then they lecture Labour on economic mismanagement...
The only cohort that actually wants this deal is Con remainers- which aligns with the only people in this place which supports the deal being Con remainers.
Interesting that May has stopped calling Con remainers "saboteurs" now they're the only people supporting her deal.
I'm a Leaver, and I support it.
It's funny, you and Richard Nabavi are both reluctant dealers, and you both seem to support it for the same reasons, though approaching from two completely different angles.
It isn't actually a deal in the sense of determining the end state. People read into what they want. We're still in cake and eat it territory. The main negotiation is still to come. It could go any direction, but I suspect we will end up in the Vassal State.
I suspect that the final deal will look much like the WA, whether negotiated by May, Corbyn, Boris or Cooper. The same dynamics around customs, agriculture and Northern Ireland will continue to apply. I suspect that a fairly free movement of people will be included too, for all sorts of practical reasons.
But as we will be following the Euro-rules in many areas, and little reason to deviate from them in other areas, probably not much will change. We will still be able to gripe about unelected law makers, but at least it will be based in truth for once.
That simply is not true. Back in the 1960s &1970s it was normal practice for the PM to address the nation via a Ministerial Broadcast. Harold Wilson did so quite regularly in relation to economic issues - including Devaluation in November 1967 - and Rhodesia. Ted Heath did so in relation to the 1972 Miners' strike and the Three-Day week at the end of 1973. Eden did so in relation to Suez in late 1956. Opposition Leaders had the right of reply.
It's generally considered in very poor form to address the public before you've addressed Parliament. But that's more a convention and a courtesy, rather than a hard and fast rule.
Once you've addressed Parliament, knock yourself out.
She has addressed Parliament, repeatedly. She faced hours of questioning in Parliament the other day.
Yes, May has done nothing wrong on this front.
Andrea Leadsom has schedule FIVE DAYS of debate in the House of the meaningful vote and its amendments. Surely there's not enough Colombian marching powder in the world to endure five whole days of that torture.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
He is top of the pops in my animal loving, recycling and vegan family and grand children
As for the rest show me a politician who is not. And I do not drink, not even sherry or whisky
G, I would be a millionaire if I had never taken a tipple. Though I am happier for it , I do enjoy a quality tipple.
That simply is not true. Back in the 1960s &1970s it was normal practice for the PM to address the nation via a Ministerial Broadcast. Harold Wilson did so quite regularly in relation to economic issues - including Devaluation in November 1967 - and Rhodesia. Ted Heath did so in relation to the 1972 Miners' strike and the Three-Day week at the end of 1973. Eden did so in relation to Suez in late 1956. Opposition Leaders had the right of reply.
It's generally considered in very poor form to address the public before you've addressed Parliament. But that's more a convention and a courtesy, rather than a hard and fast rule.
Once you've addressed Parliament, knock yourself out.
She has addressed Parliament, repeatedly. She faced hours of questioning in Parliament the other day.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
He is top of the pops in my animal loving, recycling and vegan family and grand children
As for the rest show me a politician who is not. And I do not drink, not even sherry or whisky
Does their love of animals extend to badgers, or cattle?
The only cohort that actually wants this deal is Con remainers- which aligns with the only people in this place which supports the deal being Con remainers.
Interesting that May has stopped calling Con remainers "saboteurs" now they're the only people supporting her deal.
I'm a Leaver, and I support it.
It's funny, you and Richard Nabavi are both reluctant dealers, and you both seem to support it for the same reasons, though approaching from two completely different angles.
It isn't actually a deal in the sense of determining the end state. People read into what they want. We're still in cake and eat it territory. The main negotiation is still to come. It could go any direction, but I suspect we will end up in the Vassal State.
I suspect that the final deal will look much like the WA, whether negotiated by May, Corbyn, Boris or Cooper. The same dynamics around customs, agriculture and Northern Ireland will continue to apply. I suspect that a fairly free movement of people will be included too, for all sorts of practical reasons.
But as we will be following the Euro-rules in many areas, and little reason to deviate from them in other areas, probably not much will change. We will still be able to gripe about unelected law makers, but at least it will be based in truth for once.
The political declaration is not legally binding, so arguing about what that says is yet more political displacement activity.
The only *substantive* change to the WA I think the EU would sign off on, is one that junks the backstop in exchange for an open and generous offer from us to stay in the CU indefinitely and adopt some stringent level playing field rules (meaning, practically, we'd have to fudge on FoM, the one thing May absolutely will not bend on)
That simply is not true. Back in the 1960s &1970s it was normal practice for the PM to address the nation via a Ministerial Broadcast. Harold Wilson did so quite regularly in relation to economic issues - including Devaluation in November 1967 - and Rhodesia. Ted Heath did so in relation to the 1972 Miners' strike and the Three-Day week at the end of 1973. Eden did so in relation to Suez in late 1956. Opposition Leaders had the right of reply.
It's generally considered in very poor form to address the public before you've addressed Parliament. But that's more a convention and a courtesy, rather than a hard and fast rule.
Once you've addressed Parliament, knock yourself out.
She has addressed Parliament, repeatedly. She faced hours of questioning in Parliament the other day.
Pity she never answers any of the questions
That's unfair. She answers all of them with the same answer.
Donald Tusk at G20 summit announced that if Parliament rejects the deal it will be no deal or no Brexit
He said the EU is prepared for every scenario if HOC rejects TM deal in an uncompromising speech
Tusk really should pay attention to the polls, because that kind of talk is going to push us ever closer to a remain/no-deal referendum and us crashing out without a deal.
May needs the EU27 to stop laying down threats that clearly aren't having any impact beyond further infuriating leavers into supporting no deal out of spite.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
Given all he needs to do is quote her own former and even serving cabinet members on the deal, if that is her plan I would finally agree she is not seeing things clearly.
Mr. NorthWales, sounds like encouragement to strong Remainers.
Except several polls recently have suggested that given a forced choice between remain and no deal, the people will chose no deal.
It's no good Tusk threatening the UK with a punishment no deal with the intention of scaring us into acquiescence, if we end up voting for it because it's what people want, partly out of spite to the EU.
The only cohort that actually wants this deal is Con remainers- which aligns with the only people in this place which supports the deal being Con remainers.
Interesting that May has stopped calling Con remainers "saboteurs" now they're the only people supporting her deal.
I'm a Leaver, and I support it.
It's funny, you and Richard Nabavi are both reluctant dealers, and you both seem to support it for the same reasons, though approaching from two completely different angles.
It isn't actually a deal in the sense of determining the end state. People read into what they want. We're still in cake and eat it territory. The main negotiation is still to come. It could go any direction, but I suspect we will end up in the Vassal State.
I suspect that the final deal will look much like the WA, whether negotiated by May, Corbyn, Boris or Cooper. The same dynamics around customs, agriculture and Northern Ireland will continue to apply. I suspect that a fairly free movement of people will be included too, for all sorts of practical reasons.
But as we will be following the Euro-rules in many areas, and little reason to deviate from them in other areas, probably not much will change. We will still be able to gripe about unelected law makers, but at least it will be based in truth for once.
The political declaration is not legally binding, so arguing about what that says is yet more political displacement activity.
The only *substantive* change to the WA I think the EU would sign off on, is one that junks the backstop in exchange for an open and generous offer from us to stay in the CU indefinitely and adopt some stringent level playing field rules (meaning, practically, we'd have to fudge on FoM, the one thing May absolutely will not bend on)
It is unlikely that it will be May negotiating the next phase, even if her deal passes.
Sure the political declaration is not binding, so anything could happen (backstop permitting) but the same dynamics will continue to apply re customs, NTBs, citizen movements etc. While CAP and CFP will be gone, Gove has pledged to continue the same arrangements.
Mr. NorthWales, sounds like encouragement to strong Remainers.
Except several polls recently have suggested that given a forced choice between remain and no deal, the people will chose no deal.
It's no good Tusk threatening the UK with a punishment no deal with the intention of scaring us into acquiescence, if we end up voting for it because it's what people want, partly out of spite to the EU.
5% interest rates must have sounded like music to pensioner's ears from Carney too
Mr. NorthWales, sounds like encouragement to strong Remainers.
Except several polls recently have suggested that given a forced choice between remain and no deal, the people will chose no deal.
It's no good Tusk threatening the UK with a punishment no deal with the intention of scaring us into acquiescence, if we end up voting for it because it's what people want, partly out of spite to the EU.
5% interest rates must have sounded like music to pensioner's ears from Carney too
Made me wish for no deal as well.
Is very unrewarding to be a good saver over this last decade.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
He is top of the pops in my animal loving, recycling and vegan family and grand children
As for the rest show me a politician who is not. And I do not drink, not even sherry or whisky
Does their love of animals extend to badgers, or cattle?
Donald Tusk at G20 summit announced that if Parliament rejects the deal it will be no deal or no Brexit
He said the EU is prepared for every scenario if HOC rejects TM deal in an uncompromising speech
Tusk really should pay attention to the polls, because that kind of talk is going to push us ever closer to a remain/no-deal referendum and us crashing out without a deal.
May needs the EU27 to stop laying down threats that clearly aren't having any impact beyond further infuriating leavers into supporting no deal out of spite.
Not threats. If the deal is rejected then those are the other two options. Trump is simply pointing out facts to the wilfully deaf.
Mr. Cocque, two points on that 1) UK opinion polls are not necessarily good guides 2) We don't know the theoretical options that a potential second referendum would include
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
Ha. He's on the cusp of being pm, possibly very soon, if he does get through the next few weeks. Yes yes, the polls. I just don't believe they would be sustained if an election does occur.
Regarding the debates to be fair to May the one thing she seems to be able to do is grasp the detail. If the debate is kept to the deal then on something so technical she should beat Corbyn. Has he got round to reading the document yet? This won’t be a Corbyn rally
Pretty clear there wont be a debate - no upside for Corbyn in agreeing to one.
Donald Tusk at G20 summit announced that if Parliament rejects the deal it will be no deal or no Brexit
He said the EU is prepared for every scenario if HOC rejects TM deal in an uncompromising speech
Tusk really should pay attention to the polls, because that kind of talk is going to push us ever closer to a remain/no-deal referendum and us crashing out without a deal.
May needs the EU27 to stop laying down threats that clearly aren't having any impact beyond further infuriating leavers into supporting no deal out of spite.
Not threats. If the deal is rejected then those are the other two options. Trump is simply pointing out facts to the wilfully deaf.
Donald Tusk at G20 summit announced that if Parliament rejects the deal it will be no deal or no Brexit
He said the EU is prepared for every scenario if HOC rejects TM deal in an uncompromising speech
Tusk really should pay attention to the polls, because that kind of talk is going to push us ever closer to a remain/no-deal referendum and us crashing out without a deal.
May needs the EU27 to stop laying down threats that clearly aren't having any impact beyond further infuriating leavers into supporting no deal out of spite.
Not threats. If the deal is rejected then those are the other two options. Trump is simply pointing out facts to the wilfully deaf.
Trump, Donald May, or Theresa Tusk?
All three, Like the pigs in Animal Farm they are beginning to all look alike
The only cohort that actually wants this deal is Con remainers- which aligns with the only people in this place which supports the deal being Con remainers.
Interesting that May has stopped calling Con remainers "saboteurs" now they're the only people supporting her deal.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
Unlike American Presidents, she isn't able to go on TV to do an 'address to the nation'. I don't know whether she even has that right, or not, but it would be a precedent she couldn't set (outside wartime). If she does a lunchtime press conference it will be watched only by journalists and PB'ers and then filtered through the media and miss most ordinary people. No-one watches PPBs any more; indeed I haven't seen one myself since 2017. Offering a debate with Corbyn is the only way she gets herself an unedited showing on evening weekend TV.
So she has something to announce during the debate, and the audience isn't really the public, but MPs, and specifically her own MPs (edit/ or perhaps she really does think Labour's are less idiotic than hers). It will be something sufficiently dramatic to influence their vote, and need to be said publicly so they have nowhere to hide. Which can only be to spell out what the government will do, in the event that her deal is voted down, and it will be something her MPs won't like.
That simply is not true. Back in the 1960s &1970s it was normal practice for the PM to address the nation via a Ministerial Broadcast. Harold Wilson did so quite regularly in relation to economic issues - including Devaluation in November 1967 - and Rhodesia. Ted Heath did so in relation to the 1972 Miners' strike and the Three-Day week at the end of 1973. Eden did so in relation to Suez in late 1956. Opposition Leaders had the right of reply.
It's still an option on the BBC (interesting use of "may be required", too), but Corbyn and I suspect Cable and Sturgeon would want a go too. I think the last one was Blair on Iraq in 2003.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
Given all he needs to do is quote her own former and even serving cabinet members on the deal, if that is her plan I would finally agree she is not seeing things clearly.
It's not PMQs. He'll be forced to defend his own position. Unless he finds a way to make it sound a lot more coherent, very soon, it'll be a problem for him.
Support for Theresa May's Brexit deal has risen, but only slowly. 27% of Brits now support the deal (up 12 on two weeks ago), but 45% still oppose the deal.
Conservative Remainers are most likely to back the Brexit deal, at 52%. They are, however, outweighed by the much more numerous Conservative Leavers who oppose the deal by 45% to 38%
When it comes to what MPs should do, Britons think they should vote down the deal UNLESS this would see the UK leave the EU without any deal, in which case Brits think they should support it by 42% to 32%
Mr. NorthWales, sounds like encouragement to strong Remainers.
Except several polls recently have suggested that given a forced choice between remain and no deal, the people will chose no deal.
It's no good Tusk threatening the UK with a punishment no deal with the intention of scaring us into acquiescence, if we end up voting for it because it's what people want, partly out of spite to the EU.
5% interest rates must have sounded like music to pensioner's ears from Carney too
Made me wish for no deal as well.
Is very unrewarding to be a good saver over this last decade.
I have a mortgage, and is why I really hope May's deal gets through. Don't make me and @HYUFD head down to London to protest for a "People's vote". I really really don't want to have to do that.
The only cohort that actually wants this deal is Con remainers- which aligns with the only people in this place which supports the deal being Con remainers.
Interesting that May has stopped calling Con remainers "saboteurs" now they're the only people supporting her deal.
Donald Tusk at G20 summit announced that if Parliament rejects the deal it will be no deal or no Brexit
He said the EU is prepared for every scenario if HOC rejects TM deal in an uncompromising speech
The EU doesn't have an incentive to point out the real negotiations are going to happen after Brexit. It deliberately set it up this way. But it does want to get the WA over the line, so it gets the stuff it wants first.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
"Hard negotiators" like May?
Of course not. Whoever leads the party post brexit, if ERG have not sabotaged it, needs a committed brexiteer cabinet member with hard nosed negotiators drawn from business and law to drive the separation
Gove.
Yes
There's a lot of us on this site that back Gove. He'd have been infinitely better than May in the first place - visionary, willing to take on vested interest, actually saw this as an opportunity. He's not great with the public, but neither was May.
He backs the deal and sees the way forward. I am a great admirer of Gove, especially for COE
G, if I did not know better I would say you must have been at the sherry to come out with that. Is there a bigger liar or backstabber in the Tory party than that snivelling weaselly excuse for a human being.
He is top of the pops in my animal loving, recycling and vegan family and grand children
As for the rest show me a politician who is not. And I do not drink, not even sherry or whisky
G, I would be a millionaire if I had never taken a tipple. Though I am happier for it , I do enjoy a quality tipple.
I am not a 'wee free' Malc and may have an odd cider or glass of red but generally do not like alcohol out of choice.
There have been very few occasions when Gove has made a decisive public betrayal, and off the top of my head, they were all justified and for a good cause.
Holing Boris's nascent leadership bid below the waterline, for example.
His disloyalty to David Cameron over the referendum I feel was also justified. Cameron was being cynical, Gove was a genuine optimist.
Despite the fact that Gove and May don't actually like each other much, Gove has probably done more to hold May's cabinet together than any other- and all over a deal he clearly will not like very much.
If he's disloyal to May he's an odd way of showing it.
(Of course today is the day he'll chose to resign, make me look like an idiot)
Terminating Boris Johnson's leadership bid was certainly in the national interest.
In hindsight I no longer agree.
Johnson with Gove behind him doing the legwork (like Blair with Brown behind him when the two could work together) could have achieved more than May in this process.
I agree , what Gove did to Boris Johnson on the day he was to stand for leadership of the Conservative Party , was betrayal.He is totally untrustworthy in every respect.
I notice the Leavers seem to be terrified of having "Remain" on any second referendum - presumably in case it wins.
I am a Remainer. I am quite prepared to go for No-Deal / Remain on a ballot. If No-Deal wins then so be it and we Brexit.
What Leavers fail to grasp when they warn me about the risk of losing is that now we have a clear picture of what "No Deal" means. So, if the country decides that it still wants to Leave then even I will not argue against the result.
Comments
Where there is a currency risk there is also an opportunity. Over the years we have made money from the sterling / euro exchange rather than a loss. I don't object to trading with a different currency.
Does not stop the opposition at the time blaming it all on the government of the day.
He sat at home that year as the land he bought to build houses doubled in value.
So he made more money just waiting , rather than constructing new houses.
Gove and his wife are the most untrustworthy sycophants you could imagine.
Here's a radical idea. People don't have enough money in their pockets due to the high cost of living and erosion of wages. So cap fares (cost of living) and stop eroding wages. Then people have more cash to spend on things which creates jobs And gives more people more money to spend on things.
It used to be called "capitalism" in the days before you Tories said fuck business...
To prevent the national debt rising when you inherit a budget deficit of 11% of GDP would entail the kinds of public spending cuts that Greece, Ireland, Spain etc. experienced at the time. Which you would have objected to,
As for the rest show me a politician who is not. And I do not drink, not even sherry or whisky
Holing Boris's nascent leadership bid below the waterline, for example.
His disloyalty to David Cameron over the referendum I feel was also justified. Cameron was being cynical, Gove was a genuine optimist.
Despite the fact that Gove and May don't actually like each other much, Gove has probably done more to hold May's cabinet together than any other- and all over a deal he clearly will not like very much.
If he's disloyal to May he's an odd way of showing it.
(Of course today is the day he'll chose to resign, make me look like an idiot)
Unless somebody intends to get Barnier and Varadkar's fence building firm off to wall off Scotland once they're done with Ireland.
Capping fares means someone else pays for it, usually the tax payer
A budget deficit of that size needs to be addressed by increased taxation.
But post Thatcher governments believe in flat taxes, i.e. the rich must pay no more than the poor.
Chart 2a shows how redistributive our tax and benefits system is.
Especially cathedral cities and pro-Trump social media.
Once you've addressed Parliament, knock yourself out.
In one of the Len Deighton spy novels a Pole said of a KGB officer, "you'd think they wouldn't go where they are not wanted". The reply was, "That would severely restrict their freedom of movement."
Think it might have been Spy Story.
Johnson with Gove behind him doing the legwork (like Blair with Brown behind him when the two could work together) could have achieved more than May in this process.
Borrow. Invest. Make a return on the investment. Simple economics which the Tories chose to bin - because borrowing is communism or something. Instead they have slashed spending in a way designed to slow economic output increase the cost of living and supress wages. Almost a billion pounds of additional debt and not a thing to show for it.
Then they lecture Labour on economic mismanagement...
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-30/theresa-may-s-brexit-will-cost-the-u-k-a-fortune?cmpid==socialflow-facebook-brexit&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_content=brexit&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social
But as we will be following the Euro-rules in many areas, and little reason to deviate from them in other areas, probably not much will change. We will still be able to gripe about unelected law makers, but at least it will be based in truth for once.
Andrea Leadsom has schedule FIVE DAYS of debate in the House of the meaningful vote and its amendments. Surely there's not enough Colombian marching powder in the world to endure five whole days of that torture.
The only *substantive* change to the WA I think the EU would sign off on, is one that junks the backstop in exchange for an open and generous offer from us to stay in the CU indefinitely and adopt some stringent level playing field rules (meaning, practically, we'd have to fudge on FoM, the one thing May absolutely will not bend on)
Donald Tusk at G20 summit announced that if Parliament rejects the deal it will be no deal or no Brexit
He said the EU is prepared for every scenario if HOC rejects TM deal in an uncompromising speech
Efficient.
May needs the EU27 to stop laying down threats that clearly aren't having any impact beyond further infuriating leavers into supporting no deal out of spite.
Interesting times indeed.
It's no good Tusk threatening the UK with a punishment no deal with the intention of scaring us into acquiescence, if we end up voting for it because it's what people want, partly out of spite to the EU.
Sure the political declaration is not binding, so anything could happen (backstop permitting) but the same dynamics will continue to apply re customs, NTBs, citizen movements etc. While CAP and CFP will be gone, Gove has pledged to continue the same arrangements.
Is very unrewarding to be a good saver over this last decade.
1) UK opinion polls are not necessarily good guides
2) We don't know the theoretical options that a potential second referendum would include
https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/politics/political-broadcasts#heading-ministerial-broadcasts
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00f787k
Keep enjoying your wee dram ot two
It’s a crap deal - but all the other Brexit deals are worse. With the exception of Norway, which requires FOM.
Unless you believe Corbyn fantasies.
I am a Remainer. I am quite prepared to go for No-Deal / Remain on a ballot. If No-Deal wins then so be it and we Brexit.
What Leavers fail to grasp when they warn me about the risk of losing is that now we have a clear picture of what "No Deal" means. So, if the country decides that it still wants to Leave then even I will not argue against the result.