I similarly baulk at lazy comments often heard (not necessarily from you) about Brexit being the 'will of the people' (no, it was the will of 52% of the people), ...
Actually, it was the will of 37% of "The People". Brexit was 52% of those who bothered to vote. A large fraction of "The People" could not be bothered getting off their backsides to vote.
Yep, that's a very good point. Cue a tiresome riposte from Sunil.
They put the price up, restrict me to pennies then reduce it after I bet.
You move markets.
What we should do is get him to bet on the opposite side of what he thinks is value, the price drifts in a favourable direction and the rest of us with unrestricted accounts pile in.
Mmmm... I wonder why no one has ever thought of market manipulation before?
The thing is, if a bookie doesn't back it's odds setters more than it trusts certain punters (rather than volume of money), then they really are leaving themselves open to abuse.
Looking at the original post, and even in the light of the information that the AG has recommended unilateral revocation be ruled as permissible, I still don't see it happening. There has to be a plausible route for it to happen. May won't do it.
Everyone involved has an underlying agenda, and that underlying agenda (either consciously or unconsciously) affects how they perceive what's do-able and what's right.
May was a reluctant Remainer, but that's far less a part of her identity and underlying agenda than her membership of the Conservative Party. Brexit means this to her Party: - If it does not go ahead, for whatever reason, her Party will be devastated or even destroyed. Almost all her activists would feel so utterly betrayed and a supermajority of her voters would be disgusted and turn away. It would make 1997 look like a love-pat. - If it goes ahead and is a disaster (ie No Deal and it's even half as bad as feared), the Country will blame her Party, turn against it, and it would be as disastrous for her Party as the above.
This means that it must go ahead and must not be disastrous. It would be great if it was successful or minimally damaging at least, but as long as it's not disastrous, it MUST go ahead. Because any alternative would not just mean the Party she loves is devastated or destroyed, but that she was responsible for its destruction or devastation.
Which means - she ain't ever unilaterally revoking it.
[2/3] So how can it be revoked? The only route I can see to that would be something like follows:
- May's Deal is put before Parliament and rejected overwhelmingly - We get closer to 31 March 2019 and No Deal looms dangerously close - Parliament agrees to pass May's Deal as long as it is subject to a confirmatory referendum - "Deal or Remain" (As a confirmatory referendum, this means it's written into law subject to the referendum passing, as with the AV referendum in 2011. This is as against an advisory referendum, which has no immediate legal force but advises Parliament - writing it as a confirmatory referendum removes any argument that it should not be enforced) - May accepts that - We request (and are granted) an extension to A50 to hold the referendum (The EU has already told us they'd do an extension for a referendum or General Election) - A referendum is held and Remain wins - May resigns and a PM of a temporary Government of National Unity passes a revocation to the EU - A General Election occurs
There are a number of "ifs" in there that would have to occur. However, each of them are plausible: - Parliament to reject the Deal (looks highly likely) - No substantive change to the Deal by March (looks likely; possibility of a "pivot to Norway+CU", but that looks unlikely. The alternative is for cosmetic changes to the Deal to allow it to pass, and/or for the ERG-types to blink) - May decides not to allow No Deal, no matter what, and does not resign (her successor, if she resigned, might be more sanguine with No Deal) (looks likely that she wouldn't accept No Deal; the resign-and-successor-allows-No-Deal option is somewhat harder to guess. The successor might be willing to pivot to Norway+CU, or even revoke A50 unilaterally, although I see the latter as most unlikely) - May does not decide to call a General Election with the Deal in her manifesto rather than a referendum (Hard to call this. She's had her fingers badly burned by a GE before, she knows she's not good in GE campaigns, but it might look better than the alternative. On the other hand, she might resign and her successor call a GE) - The referendum results in a win for Remain (no better than 50:50 in my eyes)
[3/3] The odds given to each step there are your own best guess. For what it's worth, my best guess (when putting wet-finger estimates to the numbers) is:
Deal passes Parliament eventually and may include cosmetic or even minor substantive changes (but not to the point of making it Norway+CU): 50%-60% General Election in the New Year: 10-15% Referendum in the New Year: 10-15% Norway+CU alternative Deal: 10% No Deal: 5-10%
If a Referendum, 50% Remain, 50% Deal. If a GE, God only knows, but probably Leave With Deal. Potential Referendum after the GE (believe it or not) if Labour wins, with similar Deal (plus CU but not Norway)
So, overall, my best guess of where we end up: Leave with Deal, eventually (possibly with CU): 75% Leave with Norway+CU: 10% Leave with No Deal: 5-10% Remain: 5-10%
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
They put the price up, restrict me to pennies then reduce it after I bet.
I got £25 but I think it's years since I last bet at Paddypower.
It seems unlikely.
But then again so do all the other options.
I'm thinking it's the easiest way for things to be done and dusted before Christmas as it makes the meaningful vote meaningful.
We know that no-deal isn't an option - today's stories about rationing make that awfully clear. So what we are left with is May's Deal or remain and it's perfectly possible to argue that if the meaningful vote reject's May's Deal they are asking to remain and for A50 to be revoked.
Yes the ERG will howl and scream forever and Parliament would have rejected the will of the people but it would no longer be the Government's problem it would belong to MP's...
"Proposed new shipping routes from the Republic to Belgium and the Netherlands after Brexit would increase transit times more than threefold, meaning Irish food would be spoiled before reaching the continent, hauliers have said.
About 80 per cent of all Irish goods exported to continental Europe go via the Channel Tunnel between England and France. Concerns have already been raised for Irish exports over long delays at the land bridge due to additional customs checks after Brexit."
I am very sympathetic to those who have concerns about some aspects of the EU’s approach and direction of travel. I am not a Eurofanatic by any means.
But we have now had two and a half years since the referendum to see for ourselves that those on the Leave side and those who have embraced the cause (Mrs May) do not have a clue about how to Leave nor what to do once we have left. To proceed as we are doing is putting us on a risky course at a time when there are other serious risks in the world, both economic and political, which have become graver than they were in 2016. Britain in 2019 is not like Britain in 1815 or Britain at the time of the Seven Years War. There are opportunities but we are not going to bestride the world shaping it to our will. We need to think about the world now not as we we would like it to be.
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
"Proposed new shipping routes from the Republic to Belgium and the Netherlands after Brexit would increase transit times more than threefold, meaning Irish food would be spoiled before reaching the continent, hauliers have said.
About 80 per cent of all Irish goods exported to continental Europe go via the Channel Tunnel between England and France. Concerns have already been raised for Irish exports over long delays at the land bridge due to additional customs checks after Brexit."
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
I don't think Southern England being used as a virtually free road bridge for trade between Ireland and the EU is much of a benefit.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for TWO hostile third party nationS that aren't trading with us isn't.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
I am very sympathetic to those who have concerns about some aspects of the EU’s approach and direction of travel. I am not a Eurofanatic by any means.
But we have now had two and a half years since the referendum to see for ourselves that those on the Leave side and those who have embraced the cause (Mrs May) do not have a clue about how to Leave nor what to do once we have left. To proceed as we are doing is putting us on a risky course at a time when there are other serious risks in the world, both economic and political, which have become graver than they were in 2016. Britain in 2019 is not like Britain in 1815 or Britain at the time of the Seven Years War. There are opportunities but we are not going to bestride the world shaping it to our will. We need to think about the world now not as we we would like it to be.
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
You'd have a better point if leavers have been in charge. Instead control has been taken by Remainers May and Robbins who have frustrated and stymied any Leavers.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
Are there really that many Russian trucks on UK roads?
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
Well, it would be a laugh whatever, seeing these two titans debating, but looks like it aint gonna happen.
Frankly a waste of time as no member of the public can vote anyway.
May may be pulling the whole vote anyway in a day or two, once she realises how bad the numbers are.
I am very sympathetic to those who have concerns about some aspects of the EU’s approach and direction of travel. I am not a Eurofanatic by any means.
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
You'd have a better point if leavers have been in charge. Instead control has been taken by Remainers May and Robbins who have frustrated and stymied any Leavers.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
I completely agree. This has been a remainers Brexit by people who never believed it was a good idea or they could make it work. It was all about damage limitation to them and nothing else. Hence the terrible negotiation and deal that can't get through parliament.
Now the remainers who consistently failed in their approach are calling for us to remain instead and sadly will probably get their wish.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
I am very sympathetic to those who have concerns about some aspects of the EU’s approach and direction of travel. I am not a Eurofanatic by any means.
But we have now had two and a half years since the referendum to see for ourselves that those on the Leave side and those who have embraced the cause (Mrs May) do not have a clue about how to Leave nor what to do once we have left.
[Snipped]
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
You'd have a better point if leavers have been in charge. Instead control has been taken by Remainers May and Robbins who have frustrated and stymied any Leavers.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
That is, if I may say so politely, rubbish. May embraced Brexit and defined it in the way best calculated to get Tory leavers supporting her. She appointed Leavers to the main three departments and they failed. Blaming one civil servant for the mess the government and leavers have made of this project is unjustifiable and, frankly, distasteful. Politicians need to take responsibility not blame others. Pretty much everything Davis, Johnson, Fox and others have said has turned out to be wrong, flawed or incoherent. That is their fault not that of Mr Robbins.
I similarly baulk at lazy comments often heard (not necessarily from you) about Brexit being the 'will of the people' (no, it was the will of 52% of the people), ...
Actually, it was the will of 37% of "The People". Brexit was 52% of those who bothered to vote. A large fraction of "The People" could not be bothered getting off their backsides to vote.
Yep, that's a very good point. Cue a tiresome riposte from Sunil.
It is why I do not expect riots if Brexit stops
30% could not be bothered to walk to the Polling Station, so I cannot see them putting the effort into hurling bricks
34% voted Remain and are unlikely to riot if we Remain
That leaves 37% many of whom are older, law-abiding Tories whose acts of rebellion involve writing letters to the Editor.
There might be outrage. The Letters Page of The Times and The Telegraph might explode but I doubt the UK will explode in flames. There will be opportunists who riot at any excuse but we live with that anyway.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
I don't think Southern England being used as a virtually free road bridge for trade between Ireland and the EU is much of a benefit.
Should tax each HGV £1000 a trip.
Irish hauliers pay 4.5 million euro per year to use UK roads
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
Are you in favour of British HGVs being subject to similar actions in other countries?
It appears that you have been breathing in a few too many leaded fumes yourself.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
My head has just disappeared in my hands again.
Suggesting Ireland is a hostile nation is very sad
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
I don't think Southern England being used as a virtually free road bridge for trade between Ireland and the EU is much of a benefit.
Should tax each HGV £1000 a trip.
Irish hauliers pay 4.5 million euro per year to use UK roads
Is that all ? Wow -on a trade worth Billions per year ?
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
He is frightened of examination by a panel.!!!! And he wants to be PM
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
I don't think Southern England being used as a virtually free road bridge for trade between Ireland and the EU is much of a benefit.
Should tax each HGV £1000 a trip.
Irish hauliers pay 4.5 million euro per year to use UK roads
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
Are you in favour of British HGVs being subject to similar actions in other countries?
It appears that you have been breathing in a few too many leaded fumes yourself.
You don't think it would be better if all these Irish to EU HGVs went via France ?
Irrespective of Brexit or not it would be a better outcome.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
My head has just disappeared in my hands again.
Suggesting Ireland is a hostile nation is very sad
The nation may not be but their current President is.
Why would they? As part of the EU, vehicles flow in and out "frictionlessly". There was no need to make a massive, hugely expensive expansion. We only need that if we screw up our trading arrangements Brexit.
The costs would certainly annihilate any "NHS Brexit Bonus" for years to come, and we would probably have to repeat it at ports around the country.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
Johnson was ForSec for two years, and Davis ditto BrexSec.
Both were hopeless beyond belief.
They were ignored throughout the whole process.
If so, they ought to have resigned in October 2017 (when the transition period was proposed) or December 2017 when the backstop was agreed in principle. If those are unacceptable to them now, then they were unacceptable then.
While it's plain that plenty of Remainers in the Commons have never had any intention of honouring the result of the Referendum, despite voting to trigger A50, Brexit-supporting MPs have been utterly stupid in assisting them, by denouncing May's deal.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
I don't think Southern England being used as a virtually free road bridge for trade between Ireland and the EU is much of a benefit.
Should tax each HGV £1000 a trip.
Irish hauliers pay 4.5 million euro per year to use UK roads
each? - peanuts otherwise
Not really. They pay a levy of £10 a day for every day or part of day they drive in the UK. It applies to all foreign vehicles over a weight limit and is a similar rate for UK drivers in other EU countries. It seems both a reasonable system and a reasonable rate.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
My head has just disappeared in my hands again.
Suggesting Ireland is a hostile nation is very sad
The nation may not be but their current President is.
No he isn’t. He is doing the best, as he sees it, for his nation. He may be going about in in a cack-handed way but Britain is hardly in a position to make that accusation about other countries, is it?
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
He is frightened of examination by a panel.!!!! And he wants to be PM
This is not a protest march
Oh come on don't be daft. They're both pants when it comes to debating but the original BBC proposal had a 20 strong panel, including members of the public?! Have you not seen BBC Question Time recently??!
I am very sympathetic to those who have concerns about some aspects of the EU’s approach and direction of travel. I am not a Eurofanatic by any means.
[Snipped]
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
You'd have a better point if leavers have been in charge. Instead control has been taken by Remainers May and Robbins who have frustrated and stymied any Leavers.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
That is, if I may say so politely, rubbish. May embraced Brexit and defined it in the way best calculated to get Tory leavers supporting her. She appointed Leavers to the main three departments and they failed. Blaming one civil servant for the mess the government and leavers have made of this project is unjustifiable and, frankly, distasteful. Politicians need to take responsibility not blame others. Pretty much everything Davis, Johnson, Fox and others have said has turned out to be wrong, flawed or incoherent. That is their fault not that of Mr Robbins.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
Are you in favour of British HGVs being subject to similar actions in other countries?
It appears that you have been breathing in a few too many leaded fumes yourself.
You don't think it would be better if all these Irish to EU HGVs went via France ?
Irrespective of Brexit or not it would be a better outcome.
It might happen anyway. Dublin, Cork and Shannon have all launched port expansion programs. Even if we Remain we may lose trade as a result.
Brexit is already damaging the UK and we have not even left yet.
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
He is frightened of examination by a panel.!!!! And he wants to be PM
This is not a protest march
Or it's maybe just that the proposed process is too complicated for him - he's not known, like many of his "socialist" peers, for his grip on detail.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
Are you in favour of British HGVs being subject to similar actions in other countries?
It appears that you have been breathing in a few too many leaded fumes yourself.
You don't think it would be better if all these Irish to EU HGVs went via France ?
Irrespective of Brexit or not it would be a better outcome.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
A few Welsh jobs serving cups of tea to drivers doesn't compensate for the costs of the diesel fumes and road damage caused, nevermind the losses due to a congested Uk motorway network.
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
He is frightened of examination by a panel.!!!! And he wants to be PM
This is not a protest march
Oh come on don't be daft. They're both pants when it comes to debating but the original BBC proposal had a 20 strong panel, including members of the public?! Have you not seen BBC Question Time recently??!
You'd have a better point if leavers have been in charge. Instead control has been taken by Remainers May and Robbins who have frustrated and stymied any Leavers.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
That is, if I may say so politely, rubbish. May embraced Brexit and defined it in the way best calculated to get Tory leavers supporting her. She appointed Leavers to the main three departments and they failed. Blaming one civil servant for the mess the government and leavers have made of this project is unjustifiable and, frankly, distasteful. Politicians need to take responsibility not blame others. Pretty much everything Davis, Johnson, Fox and others have said has turned out to be wrong, flawed or incoherent. That is their fault not that of Mr Robbins.
All good points. Additionally, the foamers were complaining a couple of years ago that Remain supporters were standing back and leaving all the heavy lifting to Leavers, and arguing that they should instead but putting their shoulders to the wheel, their noses to the grindstone etc etc.
Fast forward two years and all the Remainers who did try to make the best of it are - entirely predictably - being blamed for not having been able to overcome the inherent flaws in the project. Simultaneously, all the Remainers who continued to stand aside are still being accused of perfidy and treachery.
It turns out that Leavers can have their cake and eat it after all.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
Are you in favour of British HGVs being subject to similar actions in other countries?
It appears that you have been breathing in a few too many leaded fumes yourself.
You don't think it would be better if all these Irish to EU HGVs went via France ?
Irrespective of Brexit or not it would be a better outcome.
It might happen anyway. Dublin, Cork and Shannon have all launched port expansion programs. Even if we Remain we may lose trade as a result.
Brexit is already damaging the UK and we have not even left yet.
Good - if significantly less polluting HGVs serving Ireland's interests on our roads is the "damage" from Brexit - then sign me up.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
I don't think Southern England being used as a virtually free road bridge for trade between Ireland and the EU is much of a benefit.
Should tax each HGV £1000 a trip.
Irish hauliers pay 4.5 million euro per year to use UK roads
each? - peanuts otherwise
Not really. They pay a levy of £10 a day for every day or part of day they drive in the UK. It applies to all foreign vehicles over a weight limit and is a similar rate for UK drivers in other EU countries. It seems both a reasonable system and a reasonable rate.
still peanuts for all goods on our (and Europe's) roads when much of it can go by rail (?)
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
A few Welsh jobs serving cups of tea to drivers doesn't compensate for the costs of the diesel fumes and road damage caused, nevermind the losses due to a congested Uk motorway network.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
A few Welsh jobs serving cups of tea to drivers doesn't compensate for the costs of the diesel fumes and road damage caused, nevermind the losses due to a congested Uk motorway network.
Divert them all via Roscoff ...
Gosh, that was a very quick cost-benefit analysis.
I completely agree. This has been a remainers Brexit by people who never believed it was a good idea or they could make it work. It was all about damage limitation to them and nothing else. Hence the terrible negotiation and deal that can't get through parliament.
Now the remainers who consistently failed in their approach are calling for us to remain instead and sadly will probably get their wish.
If only there'd been a party of Leavers that had stood hundreds of candidates in every General Election since 1997, giving people the opportunity to vote for True Brexit As Implemented By Leavers. You could maybe call it the "UK Independence Party" or something like that.
You'd have a better point if leavers have been in charge. Instead control has been taken by Remainers May and Robbins who have frustrated and stymied any Leavers.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
That is, if I may say so politely, rubbish. May embraced Brexit and defined it in the way best calculated to get Tory leavers supporting her. She appointed Leavers to the main three departments and they failed. Blaming one civil servant for the mess the government and leavers have made of this project is unjustifiable and, frankly, distasteful. Politicians need to take responsibility not blame others. Pretty much everything Davis, Johnson, Fox and others have said has turned out to be wrong, flawed or incoherent. That is their fault not that of Mr Robbins.
All good points. Additionally, the foamers were complaining a couple of years ago that Remain supporters were standing back and leaving all the heavy lifting to Leavers, and arguing that they should instead but putting their shoulders to the wheel, their noses to the grindstone etc etc.
Fast forward two years and all the Remainers who did try to make the best of it are - entirely predictably - being blamed for not having been able to overcome the inherent flaws in the project. Simultaneously, all the Remainers who continued to stand aside are still being accused of perfidy and treachery.
It turns out that Leavers can have their cake and eat it after all.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
Are you in favour of British HGVs being subject to similar actions in other countries?
It appears that you have been breathing in a few too many leaded fumes yourself.
You don't think it would be better if all these Irish to EU HGVs went via France ?
Irrespective of Brexit or not it would be a better outcome.
It might happen anyway. Dublin, Cork and Shannon have all launched port expansion programs. Even if we Remain we may lose trade as a result.
Brexit is already damaging the UK and we have not even left yet.
Good - if significantly less polluting HGVs serving Ireland's interests on our roads is the "damage" from Brexit - then sign me up.
David Attenborough warned us all about climate change the other day, said we must do everything we can to fight it
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
If things are that desperate, couldn't we top up the Welsh subsidy by £10 a day?
A few Welsh jobs serving cups of tea to drivers doesn't compensate for the costs of the diesel fumes and road damage caused, nevermind the losses due to a congested Uk motorway network.
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
He is frightened of examination by a panel.!!!! And he wants to be PM
This is not a protest march
Oh come on don't be daft. They're both pants when it comes to debating but the original BBC proposal had a 20 strong panel, including members of the public?! Have you not seen BBC Question Time recently??!
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
A few Welsh jobs serving cups of tea to drivers doesn't compensate for the costs of the diesel fumes and road damage caused, nevermind the losses due to a congested Uk motorway network.
Divert them all via Roscoff ...
Perhaps you think the French should do the same for all the UK lorries heading for the rest of Europe?
I am very sympathetic to those who have concerns about some aspects of the EU’s approach and direction of travel. I am not a Eurofanatic by any means.
But we have now had two and a half years since the referendum to see for ourselves that those on the Leave side and those who have embraced the cause (Mrs May) do not have a clue about how to Leave nor what to do once we have left. To proceed as we are doing is putting us on a risky course at a time when there are other serious risks in the world, both economic and political, which have become graver than they were in 2016. Britain in 2019 is not like Britain in 1815 or Britain at the time of the Seven Years War. There are opportunities but we are not going to bestride the world shaping it to our will. We need to think about the world now not as we we would like it to be.
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
If Brexit does get overturned, I expect the outcome will be that we will remain very unhappy members, electing even more anti-EU MEPs.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
A few Welsh jobs serving cups of tea to drivers doesn't compensate for the costs of the diesel fumes and road damage caused, nevermind the losses due to a congested Uk motorway network.
Divert them all via Roscoff ...
Perhaps you think the French should do the same for all the UK lorries heading for the rest of Europe?
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
Johnson was ForSec for two years, and Davis ditto BrexSec.
Both were hopeless beyond belief.
They were ignored throughout the whole process.
If so, they ought to have resigned in October 2017 (when the transition period was proposed) or December 2017 when the backstop was agreed in principle. If those are unacceptable to them now, then they were unacceptable then.
While it's plain that plenty of Remainers in the Commons have never had any intention of honouring the result of the Referendum, despite voting to trigger A50, Brexit-supporting MPs have been utterly stupid in assisting them, by denouncing May's deal.
Perhaps they should have done, but that does not change the fact that she ignored them.
And Brexit supporting MPs aren't being stupid in rejecting the deal if they find it unacceptable. It's exactly what they should be doing.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
My head has just disappeared in my hands again.
Suggesting Ireland is a hostile nation is very sad
The nation may not be but their current President is.
No he isn’t. He is doing the best, as he sees it, for his nation. He may be going about in in a cack-handed way but Britain is hardly in a position to make that accusation about other countries, is it?
I must have missed the bit where he claimed to be talking for Britain
I am very sympathetic to those who have concerns about some aspects of the EU’s approach and direction of travel. I am not a Eurofanatic by any means.
But we have now had two and a half years since the referendum to see for ourselves that those on the Leave side and those who have embraced the cause (Mrs May) do not have a clue about how to Leave nor what to do once we have left. To proceed as we are doing is putting us on a risky course at a time when there are other serious risks in the world, both economic and political, which have become graver than they were in 2016. Britain in 2019 is not like Britain in 1815 or Britain at the time of the Seven Years War. There are opportunities but we are not going to bestride the world shaping it to our will. We need to think about the world now not as we we would like it to be.
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
If Brexit does get overturned, I expect the outcome will be that we will remain very unhappy members, electing even more anti-EU MEPs.
Since they only get to rubber stamp what is put in front of them I'm sure the EU couldn't give a toss.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
I don't think Southern England being used as a virtually free road bridge for trade between Ireland and the EU is much of a benefit.
Should tax each HGV £1000 a trip.
Irish hauliers pay 4.5 million euro per year to use UK roads
each? - peanuts otherwise
Not really. They pay a levy of £10 a day for every day or part of day they drive in the UK. It applies to all foreign vehicles over a weight limit and is a similar rate for UK drivers in other EU countries. It seems both a reasonable system and a reasonable rate.
still peanuts for all goods on our (and Europe's) roads when much of it can go by rail (?)
So you are advocating building a goods railway from the Welsh ports to the channel Tunnel? Not sure that is going to get much support.
Anyway the question of rail vs road is a separate issue.
I completely agree. This has been a remainers Brexit by people who never believed it was a good idea or they could make it work. It was all about damage limitation to them and nothing else. Hence the terrible negotiation and deal that can't get through parliament.
Now the remainers who consistently failed in their approach are calling for us to remain instead and sadly will probably get their wish.
If only there'd been a party of Leavers that had stood hundreds of candidates in every General Election since 1997, giving people the opportunity to vote for True Brexit As Implemented By Leavers. You could maybe call it the "UK Independence Party" or something like that.
Today we have seen the ultra brexiteers say we can walk out of the EU without paying a penny, we can revoke A50 and then invoke it, Ireland is a hostile nation, and Holyhead is unimportant for the Welsh economy
And they think they will achieve a hard brexit. Fortunately today ended all that and they have TM brexit or we remain. Their choice
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
Except that the problem is that the brexit debate isn't a general election, where the PM and the LotO could fairly stand as representative of the main choice.
May and Corbyn hold very similar views on Brexit and a debate between them would be arguing about angels on pinheads, while voices representative of Remain or a harder Brexit (who between them probably represent about 70-80% of opinion) would not get a look in.
I completely agree. This has been a remainers Brexit by people who never believed it was a good idea or they could make it work. It was all about damage limitation to them and nothing else. Hence the terrible negotiation and deal that can't get through parliament.
Now the remainers who consistently failed in their approach are calling for us to remain instead and sadly will probably get their wish.
If only there'd been a party of Leavers that had stood hundreds of candidates in every General Election since 1997, giving people the opportunity to vote for True Brexit As Implemented By Leavers. You could maybe call it the "UK Independence Party" or something like that.
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
Johnson was ForSec for two years, and Davis ditto BrexSec.
Both were hopeless beyond belief.
They were ignored throughout the whole process.
If so, they ought to have resigned in October 2017 (when the transition period was proposed) or December 2017 when the backstop was agreed in principle. If those are unacceptable to them now, then they were unacceptable then.
While it's plain that plenty of Remainers in the Commons have never had any intention of honouring the result of the Referendum, despite voting to trigger A50, Brexit-supporting MPs have been utterly stupid in assisting them, by denouncing May's deal.
Perhaps they should have done, but that does not change the fact that she ignored them.
And Brexit supporting MPs aren't being stupid in rejecting the deal if they find it unacceptable. It's exactly what they should be doing.
It's stupid to make the best the enemy of the good. If the ECJ concurs with the Advocate General's opinion, then we won't be getting No Deal, if the WA gets voted down, but Remain.
Good - if significantly less polluting HGVs serving Ireland's interests on our roads is the "damage" from Brexit - then sign me up.
TBH I am, for once in my life, largely with TGOHF on this one. It's the same lunacy as the third runway at Heathrow, where we are determined to turn ourselves into a hub of congestion and pollution largely for the benefit of kiss-and-go travellers.
If we charged the full environmental cost of cross-Britain transport to Irish hauliers, those hauliers would largely (perishables aside) find it more economical to go by sea. We don't. We have chosen to subsidise jobs in the port industry instead. So we continue to concrete over our countryside - such as the M11 extension replacing the A14 from Cambridge to Huntingdon to provide a faster route to Felixstowe - and increase our already illegal air pollution levels.
At least the other European hub airport, Schiphol, is in a country with a sane local transport policy focused on bikes, pedestrians and local trains. We have a hub airport, Irish HGV traffic, car-centric cities and ever-rising train fares. It's pretty much a quadruple pollution whammy.
Scott thinks that HGVs travelling the length of Europe and onward into Britain, thundering accross our countryside to collect Irish goods is a good thing.
You don't think free trade is a good thing?
Wow
Free trade is a good thing.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
"hostile"
"Freeloading" would also work.
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
And Leavers wonder why non-cultists think they're completely unhinged.
You are in favour of HGV's ploughing through the nation, giving children asthma just for the benefit of fatcat Irish producers ?
You do realise that Irish hauliers are the lifeblood of the North Wales economy and specifically the port of Holyhead. Try selling that to the voters on Anglesey
If things are that desperate, couldn't we top up the Welsh subsidy by £10 a day?
These are thousands of good jobs you are so airily dismissing. Your brexit is over. Take TM deal or remain. Your choice
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
To be fair Jezza has agreed to the ITV format which is a simple head to head with just a moderator.
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
Well, it would be a laugh whatever, seeing these two titans debating, but looks like it aint gonna happen.
Frankly a waste of time as no member of the public can vote anyway.
May may be pulling the whole vote anyway in a day or two, once she realises how bad the numbers are.
Doing both seems an obvious compromise, and enables whoever suggests that idea first to say the other is scared of more scrutiny/debate etc.
Sir Geoff makes some points to Johnny Bercow about the contempt motion (inter alia: "what exactly do they want to know?" and "you do know there are some potential cans of worms in this lot which might be awks if there's a blanket order to reveal?")
Comments
Looking at the original post, and even in the light of the information that the AG has recommended unilateral revocation be ruled as permissible, I still don't see it happening.
There has to be a plausible route for it to happen. May won't do it.
Everyone involved has an underlying agenda, and that underlying agenda (either consciously or unconsciously) affects how they perceive what's do-able and what's right.
May was a reluctant Remainer, but that's far less a part of her identity and underlying agenda than her membership of the Conservative Party. Brexit means this to her Party:
- If it does not go ahead, for whatever reason, her Party will be devastated or even destroyed. Almost all her activists would feel so utterly betrayed and a supermajority of her voters would be disgusted and turn away. It would make 1997 look like a love-pat.
- If it goes ahead and is a disaster (ie No Deal and it's even half as bad as feared), the Country will blame her Party, turn against it, and it would be as disastrous for her Party as the above.
This means that it must go ahead and must not be disastrous. It would be great if it was successful or minimally damaging at least, but as long as it's not disastrous, it MUST go ahead. Because any alternative would not just mean the Party she loves is devastated or destroyed, but that she was responsible for its destruction or devastation.
Which means - she ain't ever unilaterally revoking it.
So how can it be revoked?
The only route I can see to that would be something like follows:
- May's Deal is put before Parliament and rejected overwhelmingly
- We get closer to 31 March 2019 and No Deal looms dangerously close
- Parliament agrees to pass May's Deal as long as it is subject to a confirmatory referendum - "Deal or Remain" (As a confirmatory referendum, this means it's written into law subject to the referendum passing, as with the AV referendum in 2011. This is as against an advisory referendum, which has no immediate legal force but advises Parliament - writing it as a confirmatory referendum removes any argument that it should not be enforced)
- May accepts that
- We request (and are granted) an extension to A50 to hold the referendum (The EU has already told us they'd do an extension for a referendum or General Election)
- A referendum is held and Remain wins
- May resigns and a PM of a temporary Government of National Unity passes a revocation to the EU
- A General Election occurs
There are a number of "ifs" in there that would have to occur. However, each of them are plausible:
- Parliament to reject the Deal (looks highly likely)
- No substantive change to the Deal by March (looks likely; possibility of a "pivot to Norway+CU", but that looks unlikely. The alternative is for cosmetic changes to the Deal to allow it to pass, and/or for the ERG-types to blink)
- May decides not to allow No Deal, no matter what, and does not resign (her successor, if she resigned, might be more sanguine with No Deal) (looks likely that she wouldn't accept No Deal; the resign-and-successor-allows-No-Deal option is somewhat harder to guess. The successor might be willing to pivot to Norway+CU, or even revoke A50 unilaterally, although I see the latter as most unlikely)
- May does not decide to call a General Election with the Deal in her manifesto rather than a referendum (Hard to call this. She's had her fingers badly burned by a GE before, she knows she's not good in GE campaigns, but it might look better than the alternative. On the other hand, she might resign and her successor call a GE)
- The referendum results in a win for Remain (no better than 50:50 in my eyes)
The odds given to each step there are your own best guess.
For what it's worth, my best guess (when putting wet-finger estimates to the numbers) is:
Deal passes Parliament eventually and may include cosmetic or even minor substantive changes (but not to the point of making it Norway+CU): 50%-60%
General Election in the New Year: 10-15%
Referendum in the New Year: 10-15%
Norway+CU alternative Deal: 10%
No Deal: 5-10%
If a Referendum, 50% Remain, 50% Deal.
If a GE, God only knows, but probably Leave With Deal. Potential Referendum after the GE (believe it or not) if Labour wins, with similar Deal (plus CU but not Norway)
So, overall, my best guess of where we end up:
Leave with Deal, eventually (possibly with CU): 75%
Leave with Norway+CU: 10%
Leave with No Deal: 5-10%
Remain: 5-10%
Did you believe it?
We know that no-deal isn't an option - today's stories about rationing make that awfully clear. So what we are left with is May's Deal or remain and it's perfectly possible to argue that if the meaningful vote reject's May's Deal they are asking to remain and for A50 to be revoked.
Yes the ERG will howl and scream forever and Parliament would have rejected the will of the people but it would no longer be the Government's problem it would belong to MP's...
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/post-brexit-shipping-routes-would-mean-spoiled-irish-food-1.3589873
"Proposed new shipping routes from the Republic to Belgium and the Netherlands after Brexit would increase transit times more than threefold, meaning Irish food would be spoiled before reaching the continent, hauliers have said.
About 80 per cent of all Irish goods exported to continental Europe go via the Channel Tunnel between England and France. Concerns have already been raised for Irish exports over long delays at the land bridge due to additional customs checks after Brexit."
But we have now had two and a half years since the referendum to see for ourselves that those on the Leave side and those who have embraced the cause (Mrs May) do not have a clue about how to Leave nor what to do once we have left. To proceed as we are doing is putting us on a risky course at a time when there are other serious risks in the world, both economic and political, which have become graver than they were in 2016. Britain in 2019 is not like Britain in 1815 or Britain at the time of the Seven Years War. There are opportunities but we are not going to bestride the world shaping it to our will. We need to think about the world now not as we we would like it to be.
A grown up country, a grown up leadership would take stock and ask itself whether it wants to to go ahead. I think we should do this and soon - and if this Advocate-General’s opinion is followed - it provides us with a face-saving way of doing so.
Shouting “will of the people” is not an answer. Saying to the people “ we and you now know the reality of what leave might mean, which we did not know at the time of the referendum” and so we are revisiting the decision is, IMO, living up to our responsibilities not shirking them.
And if we decide to Remain, then we have an obligation to rethink our approach to what it means being a member of the EU, to what Britain’s role in the world should be. We could contribute a great deal if we stopped behaving so often like that Harry Enfield character muttering in the corner “I wouldn’t do it like that, if I were you”. We have been taught a brutal lesson about the limits of our power and about the changed realities of the world but if we, if our political class are wise we can use those harsh lessons for our benefit.
We have also been taught some tough lessons about the concerns of many in our country. We should act on those lessons. We need to think very much harder about sharing the fruits of our economy more fairly and more widely and sharing the costs more equally. We need fresh thinking all round. Whether we will get it with our current crop of politicians repeating tired old soundbites or serving up reheated failed old policies I doubt. But there is an opportunity here, if we could just see it and be brave and seize it.
Wow
Should tax each HGV £1000 a trip.
Having our motorways clogged up by hauliers for a hostile third party nation that aren't trading with us isn't.
They should withdraw the offer to Corbyn and ask Farage instead...
Put leavers in charge and even see if they don't know what they are talking about.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/04/bbc-itv-plan-rival-brexit-debates-corbyn-may-cant-agree-format
Perhaps a class action by the Uk public against the ROI for the pollution and poor health caused by their gas guzzling HGV's would be welcome ?
The BBC format is a total pigs ear including opening statements, closing statements and a panel of experts for some reason, they'll probably chuck in the mad Newsnight vicar aswell!
I can't say I am enthusiastic about seeing the two of them debate regardless, but if they're going to do it they should go with the straightforward ITV format. Corbyn should stick to his guns on this.
Both were hopeless beyond belief.
Frankly a waste of time as no member of the public can vote anyway.
May may be pulling the whole vote anyway in a day or two, once she realises how bad the numbers are.
This feels like the most significant thing that will happen today.
Now the remainers who consistently failed in their approach are calling for us to remain instead and sadly will probably get their wish.
30% could not be bothered to walk to the Polling Station, so I cannot see them putting the effort into hurling bricks
34% voted Remain and are unlikely to riot if we Remain
That leaves 37% many of whom are older, law-abiding Tories whose acts of rebellion involve writing letters to the Editor.
There might be outrage. The Letters Page of The Times and The Telegraph might explode but I doubt the UK will explode in flames. There will be opportunists who riot at any excuse but we live with that anyway.
It appears that you have been breathing in a few too many leaded fumes yourself.
Suggesting Ireland is a hostile nation is very sad
That is taking the piss.
This is not a protest march
Irrespective of Brexit or not it would be a better outcome.
The costs would certainly annihilate any "NHS Brexit Bonus" for years to come, and we would probably have to repeat it at ports around the country.
While it's plain that plenty of Remainers in the Commons have never had any intention of honouring the result of the Referendum, despite voting to trigger A50, Brexit-supporting MPs have been utterly stupid in assisting them, by denouncing May's deal.
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1068539467106013185
Brexit is already damaging the UK and we have not even left yet.
Divert them all via Roscoff ...
Fast forward two years and all the Remainers who did try to make the best of it are - entirely predictably - being blamed for not having been able to overcome the inherent flaws in the project. Simultaneously, all the Remainers who continued to stand aside are still being accused of perfidy and treachery.
It turns out that Leavers can have their cake and eat it after all.
And Brexit supporting MPs aren't being stupid in rejecting the deal if they find it unacceptable. It's exactly what they should be doing.
Anyway the question of rail vs road is a separate issue.
Later peeps!
And they think they will achieve a hard brexit. Fortunately today ended all that and they have TM brexit or we remain. Their choice
May and Corbyn hold very similar views on Brexit and a debate between them would be arguing about angels on pinheads, while voices representative of Remain or a harder Brexit (who between them probably represent about 70-80% of opinion) would not get a look in.
If we charged the full environmental cost of cross-Britain transport to Irish hauliers, those hauliers would largely (perishables aside) find it more economical to go by sea. We don't. We have chosen to subsidise jobs in the port industry instead. So we continue to concrete over our countryside - such as the M11 extension replacing the A14 from Cambridge to Huntingdon to provide a faster route to Felixstowe - and increase our already illegal air pollution levels.
At least the other European hub airport, Schiphol, is in a country with a sane local transport policy focused on bikes, pedestrians and local trains. We have a hub airport, Irish HGV traffic, car-centric cities and ever-rising train fares. It's pretty much a quadruple pollution whammy.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/761475/Letter_to_Speaker.pdf