This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Unfortunately, David doesn't seem to realise we'll never ever get to negotiating it unless the WA passes.
It has a max time-limit of 45 months - less than most care hire-purchase agreements - but the ERG morons can't see past it.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
The backstop is a massive red herring. Both the UK and the EU know they've f*cked this up, and it's in neither's interests for it to continue.
I hereafter.
Not sure about the timeline - I suspect the deal will take a lot longer to do, once the talking actually starts - but in the end I agree that we are going to have a very close relationship with the EU, and will to all intents and purposes be a part of its sphere of influence.
That's because you always take the most negative or cynical interpretation of any possible event or set of events.
I memberships.
I'd be very comfortable with that.
I agree. I don't think it is negative. We need to be as closely aligned to the EU as our politics will allow. God save us from the delusions of the Bumbling Buccaneers.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
Yep, our choice will be to be as closely aligned to the EU as is politically possible because in reality we will have no other choice - especially in areas such as digital, finance and services which so easily cross national boundaries.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
And you said it repeatedly about Trump.
JackW is a clever man. But -- & it pains me to say it -- Trump was a cleverer man. He saw a way.
Who knows, maybe TMay is cleverer?
I think she certainly is.
Trump was very lucky, and his path to victory a very narrow one. I'd say he just had a strong instinct - combined with his own egoism - that there were a lot of Americans who thought like him, that he knew where to find them, and that the Democrats were largely ignoring or insulting them.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Unfortunately, David doesn't seem to realise we'll never ever get to negotiating it unless the WA passes.
It has a max time-limit of 45 months - less than most care hire-purchase agreements - but the ERG morons can't see past it.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
The backstop is a massive red herring. Both the UK and the EU know they've f*cked this up, and it's in neither's interests for it to continue.
I fully expected it to be superseded by a new FTA in 2021 or 2022 that will include our formal exit from the customs union, with a level of special rules for NI, and close customs cooperation between the UK and EU thereafter.
You are the one totally missing the point. If we were all confident the FTA would be in effect then there would be no problem. Nobody is objecting that strenuously to a transition. It is the permanent backstop that is the problem and there is no time limit on that.
You and Mr Nabavi claim the EU don't want the backstop to be permanent but given the upset it is causing here they could resolve that by not making it permanent. They haven't. Judge by deeds not words and the deeds are that they have moved heaven and earth to screw out of us a permanent backstop from which there is no time limit and no unilateral escape.
You do know the EU didn't want the backstop to apply to the whole of the UK, don't you? And that they view this as "cherrypicking" because we get full customs alignment totally for free, and with no free movement on people on top?
Customs alignment isn't tied to free movement. Turkey has customs alignment but no free movement.
I voted to end customs alignment. Even EFTA would achieve that but the backstop doesn't.
And, that will come, once we've negotiated a final FTA.
It's very obvious it's a red line for this Conservative Government.
You mean once EU have dictated the total capitulation trade deal with a take it or have permanent limbo clause.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
With ERG on board it would be nearer to passing the HoC than any of the other options....
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I don't expect that to happen. The EU runs a multilateral system. It isn't interested in offering a third party a say over that system. It won't change anything it does to accommodate the interests of that third party. Bilateralism is out. Now we can shadow the system on a unilateral basis but that doesn't get any commitment from the other party for stuff that we want and need. We only get that if the EU decides we are compliant. Which means following their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
Mr. Royale, the guidance to Article 50 included looking to the future trade agreement. That was hardly the EU priority, preferring to give us a second cliff-edge or permanent caging in the backstop. Similarly, EU promises over not using EU institutions for the eurozone or reforming CAP if only we sacrificed half our rebate proved less than kept.
I don't trust the EU.
I think this is what it boils down to. I don't trust the EU either, which is why I don't want to Remain, but I am satisfied it institutionally does negotiate within the bounds of its political agreements.
In respect of A50, I'd argue that's been discharged. We do have a look to the future trade agreement, and an agreement on what that should look like. And I'm happy with that.
No doubt there will be ups and downs in its negotiations, and give and take - that's politics - but I do believe we will end up with a good FTA and a fair deal.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I don't expect that to happen. The EU runs a multilateral system. It isn't interested in offering a third party a say over that system. It won't change anything it does to accommodate the interests of that third party. Bilateralism is out. Now we can shadow the system on a unilateral basis but that doesn't get any commitment from the other party for stuff that we want and need. We only get that if the EU decides we are compliant. Which means following their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
He is though. He's never conceded any of his forecasts might be wrong, despite repeatedly embarrassing himself on here with them, and then simply moves onto the next.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
And you said it repeatedly about Trump.
JackW is a clever man. But -- & it pains me to say it -- Trump was a cleverer man. He saw a way.
Who knows, maybe TMay is cleverer?
I think there was at least some polling evidence that Trump would do better than the consensus expected. Not sure if there's anything similar for Tessy's deal.
I'm not sure I do, either. Something I could never say in a professional environment in London, or I be dismissed.
We should be celebrating what unites and binds us in our local, regional and national communities, not emphasising and worshipping the differences, which invariably always boils down to the race/gender/sexuality kind - with personality, preference, politics, or family background, barely getting a look in - and simply encourages identity politics.
Identity politics matter because once you have been discriminated against for merely existing, then you tend to get worked up about it.
Suppose someone told you that you could not take out a mortgage because you were a man - get your wife to come down and sign the papers, or your mother, or your sister or some other female relative. You would explode with anger. Yet within living memory, many women had the mirror image of that experience.
Identity is all people have. It defines us. Everything else can be taken away from you. Our bodies and personalities are the only guaranteed possessions we have an ever changing world. They should not used to discriminate against us.
Holding onto past injustice forever is not a route to peace in the present. You say we only have our identity, but then you mention our bodies and personalities, which are quite different things.
Identity politics doesn’t lead anywhere. It is a war of all against all, forever.
No thanks.
It works both ways too.
We voted Leave in large part because a number of us (myself included) felt our British identity was under threat if we stayed.
The only real conclusion you can draw is let people be, and be careful not to take steps or actions that could make people feel their identity is threatened.
Well a big part of my British identity is a preference for pragmatism and common sense. The whole Brexit episode has been a huge blow to that.
But that aside, how do you suppose that the EU is threatening our identity? It isn't as if our identity is some frail flower that needs a fence to protect it. Our language is used all over the world. Our universities are in the top league. We have a long and well documented history, and the likes of Shakespeare, Darwin and Newton command respect everywhere that people have got past subsistence farming.
For God's sake grow a pair. Britain's identity is perfectly safe as part of a union of European countries.
If we do have a GE, the Labour manifesto writer is going to have one hell of a time concocting a convoluted form of words on Brexit that means different things depending who is reading.
The twitter feed is about transsexuals banned from public toilets, women of colour against the sex trade, rape trials in Worcestershire, domestic violence in Preston, missing teddies, lost dogs in Northampton, re-tweets of job adverts for third sector organisations.
I can find hardly anything about Wales (apart from an occasional retweet).
The twitter feed looks like she is much, much more interested in gender politics than Welsh politics.
The world that she inhabits is just so remote from the forgotten, desperate people in the grim, drug-addled Council estates in Llanelli that she represents.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
Twas a month but what's a few weeks between parliamentary votes these days and I make no prognostication post Tuesday save May's Deal is dead.
[Our] constitution is stuck together from parliamentary conventions, precedents, international agreements, unwritten understandings, judicial rulings and legislative sticky notes. This seemed serviceable enough – until this spatchcocked structure collided with something as colossal as Brexit. We are partly paying the price for making such a massive decision by simple plebiscite, without having properly settled rules about referendums and how they can be reconciled with representative democracy.
It is very hard work to amend the constitution of the United States and a change can only be made if there is a wide and deep consensus. Britain is heading out of the EU, the most consequential act in decades, on the basis of one ballot held nearly three years ago in which just one vote could have decided the outcome. The closeness of the result and the lack of agreement about what it meant spelled trouble from the start. It also led to the inevitable convulsions that were going to follow when a parliament largely against Brexit was tasked with implementing a result most MPs thought a mistake, a challenge without precedent. This conundrum might have been eased had Mrs May responded to her task with a non-partisan, cross-party approach, but she made things harder when she started out by seeking to please one faction of her party alone.
I think the problem with that article is that it ignores the fact that leaving in the way we have (as far as the voting mechanism goes) is the only way it was ever going to be possible to achieve it. Given that the political classes in Britain are almost wholly opposed to leaving the EU, there was no way they were ever going to undertake the work and produce a process that allowed it to happen. The process itself would have been designed to prevent any possibility of Leaving. So you would have been left with an increasingly unhappy population forced to remain in the EU by the will of a small ruling elite.
Eventually of course something would have given but the result would have been far more messy and far nastier than we are seeing now.
This at least, Cameron understood. His mistake, from his perspective, was underestimating just how far down that road we had already travelled.
Not seen it yet on Marr, but seems Jezza has finally been flushed out as a Leaver and there is no way he will allow a 2nd vote.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
Not just Corbyn today. John Mann on Sky this morning said he will vote for TM deal and that labour will not agree another referendum, and Rebecca Long Bailey on the same programme said that if they win a GE they will campaign for a better Brexit
If we do have a GE, the Labour manifesto writer is going to have one hell of a time concocting a convoluted form of words on Brexit that means different things depending who is reading.
I'm not sure I do, either. Something I could never say in a professional environment in London, or I be dismissed.
We should be celebrating what unites and binds us in our local, regional and national communities, not emphasising and worshipping the differences, which invariably always boils down to the race/gender/sexuality kind - with personality, preference, politics, or family background, barely getting a look in - and simply encourages identity politics.
Identity is all people have. It defines us. Everything else can be taken away from you. Our bodies and personalities are the only guaranteed possessions we have an ever changing world. They should not used to discriminate against us.
Holding onto past injustice forever is not a route to peace in the present. You say we only have our identity, but then you mention our bodies and personalities, which are quite different things.
Identity politics doesn’t lead anywhere. It is a war of all against all, forever.
No thanks.
It works both ways too.
We voted Leave in large part because a number of us (myself included) felt our British identity was under threat if we stayed.
The only real conclusion you can draw is let people be, and be careful not to take steps or actions that could make people feel their identity is threatened.
Well a big part of my British identity is a preference for pragmatism and common sense. The whole Brexit episode has been a huge blow to that.
But that aside, how do you suppose that the EU is threatening our identity? It isn't as if our identity is some frail flower that needs a fence to protect it. Our language is used all over the world. Our universities are in the top league. We have a long and well documented history, and the likes of Shakespeare, Darwin and Newton command respect everywhere that people have got past subsistence farming.
For God's sake grow a pair. Britain's identity is perfectly safe as part of a union of European countries.
I'm not debating Brexit with you. The reasoning behind my vote, and those of the Leave constituency at large, have been very well ventilated on here, repeatedly, for nearly three years.
If you're still struggling, you should perhaps take a step back from your computer and ask yourself what the EU might have done or might be pursuing that led to so many of your compatriots feeling so strongly and differently than you, rather than stating your own point of view, and demanding they, repeatedly, explain it for you.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I don't expect that to happen. The EU runs a multilateral system. It isn't interested in offering a third party a say over that system. It won't change anything it does to accommodate the interests of that third party. Bilateralism is out. Now we can shadow the system on a unilateral basis but that doesn't get any commitment from the other party for stuff that we want and need. We only get that if the EU decides we are compliant. Which means following their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
He is though. He's never conceded any of his forecasts might be wrong, despite repeatedly embarrassing himself on here with them, and then simply moves onto the next.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
He's been pretty much spot on, like everyone else who realised a long time ago that any deal the UK gets with the EU will be done on the EU's terms because they are in a much stronger position than we are.
My Twitter has a lot of followers who remain very much alive!
I'm not sure I do, either. Something I could never say in a professional environment in London, or I be dismissed.
We should be celebrating what unites and binds us in our local, regional and national communities, not emphasising and worshipping the differences, which invariably always boils down to the race/gender/sexuality kind - with personality, preference, politics, or family background, barely getting a look in - and simply encourages identity politics.
Identity politics matter because once you have been discriminated against for merely existing, then you tend to get worked up about it.
Suppose someone told you that you could not take out a mortgage because you were a man - get your wife to come down and sign the papers, or your mother, or your sister or some other female relative. You would explode with anger. Yet within living memory, many women had the mirror image of that experience.
Identity is all people have. It defines us. Everything else can be taken away from you. Our bodies and personalities are the only guaranteed possessions we have an ever changing world. They should not used to discriminate against us.
Holding onto past injustice forever is not a route to peace in the present. You say we only have our identity, but then you mention our bodies and personalities, which are quite different things.
Identity politics doesn’t lead anywhere. It is a war of all against all, forever.
No thanks.
It works both ways too.
We voted Leave in large part because a number of us (myself included) felt our British identity was under threat if we stayed.
The only real conclusion you can draw is let people be, and be careful not to take steps or actions that could make people feel their identity is threatened.
Well a big part of my British identity is a preference for pragmatism and common sense. The whole Brexit episode has been a huge blow to that.
But that aside, how do you suppose that the EU is threatening our identity? It isn't as if our identity is some frail flower that needs a fence to protect it. Our language is used all over the world. Our universities are in the top league. We have a long and well documented history, and the likes of Shakespeare, Darwin and Newton command respect everywhere that people have got past subsistence farming.
For God's sake grow a pair. Britain's identity is perfectly safe as part of a union of European countries.
For the Ultras they're already fearful about their version of Britain's identity being threatened within Britain & by the 21st Century. The EU is just a proxy.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
And you said it repeatedly about Trump.
JackW is a clever man. But -- & it pains me to say it -- Trump was a cleverer man. He saw a way.
Who knows, maybe TMay is cleverer?
I'm outraged "cleverer" !!!!! ... but humbled by the whole 2016 POTUS election. One point out in my final vote prediction but so far adrift in the Electoral College. Clinton winning by 3 million votes but losing Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan by tiny margins and with it the White House.
It certainly wasn't dull, either before or after !!!!
On topic: things in Italy will get really interesting when the next recession hits the Eurozone, and indeed there are some suggestions that this is already on the way.
. Before the Euro Italy avoided the consequences of deficits by moderate inflation and depreciation which meant the burden of old debts faded away. We did something similar, just not to the same degree. The Euro under German domination has always been focused on low inflation and being a hard currency. The correct response to this would have been for Italy to run surpluses to reduce debt but that would also have caused an even deeper recession and been politically unpopular.
The problem is that there is no easy answer to the debt. Italy should never have joined the Euro with it.
The Italians have also stopped reproducing. Their birthrate has not been above 1.5 since the early 80s. An inverted population pyramid will lead to fairly dire financial consequences, as the Chinese will discover in the 2020s.
Indeed although ironically their immigration should help with that if they can integrate the immigrants and make them productive.
They cannot find jobs for their own educated young, never mind a load of immigrants they don’t want.
And they don’t particularly buy into the whole diversity shtick, either.
I'm not sure I do, either. Something I could never say in a professional environment in London, or I'd be dismissed.
We should be celebrating what unites and binds us in our local, regional and national communities, not emphasising and worshipping the differences, which invariably always boils down to the race/gender/sexuality kind - with personality, preference, politics, or family background, barely getting a look in - and simply encourages identity politics.
That is a very interesting post and goes some way to explaining the mystery that is the psyche of a Leaver. What is it that against the certainty that our society will deteriorate both socially and economically makes them want to leave? It's that it is a visceral fear and only visible to those who feel it.
It is called "Maintaining privilege" Roger. Those on top do not like competition and, given the display of "talent" from prominent Leavers, I would say that they have plenty to be worried about.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
And you said it repeatedly about Trump.
JackW is a clever man. But -- & it pains me to say it -- Trump was a cleverer man. He saw a way.
Who knows, maybe TMay is cleverer?
I think there was at least some polling evidence that Trump would do better than the consensus expected. Not sure if there's anything similar for Tessy's deal.
I suspect Tessy may do better than consensus too.
But did anyone in Europe actually seriously predict that Trump would win? I mean, did anyone sensible provide a well-argued, evidence-based case that Trump could win. (I know a few right-wing shouty crackers said Trump could win).
I am not criticising JackW. I also didn't expect in a million years that Trump would win.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Unfortunately, David doesn't seem to realise we'll never ever get to negotiating it unless the WA passes.
It has a max time-limit of 45 months - less than most care hire-purchase agreements - but the ERG morons can't see past it.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
snip
You are the one totally missing the point. If we were all confident the FTA would be in effect then there would be no problem. Nobody is objecting that strenuously to a transition. It is the permanent backstop that is the problem and there is no time limit on that.
You and Mr Nabavi claim the EU don't want the backstop to be permanent but given the upset it is causing here they could resolve that by not making it permanent. They haven't. Judge by deeds not words and the deeds are that they have moved heaven and earth to screw out of us a permanent backstop from which there is no time limit and no unilateral escape.
You do know the EU didn't want the backstop to apply to the whole of the UK, don't you? And that they view this as "cherrypicking" because we get full customs alignment totally for free, and with no free movement on people on top?
Customs alignment isn't tied to free movement. Turkey has customs alignment but no free movement.
I voted to end customs alignment. Even EFTA would achieve that but the backstop doesn't.
And, that will come, once we've negotiated a final FTA.
It's very obvious it's a red line for this Conservative Government.
You mean once EU have dictated the total capitulation trade deal with a take it or have permanent limbo clause.
Again, rhetoric, and not evidence-based.
I despair. I really do.
Well given the initial sack of merde they negotiated in over two years, you have to be some kind of moron to think round two will be an improvement,, especially given they have insisted in loaded dice being used.
I'm not debating Brexit with you. The reasoning behind my vote, and those of the Leave constituency at large, have been very well ventilated on here, repeatedly, for nearly three years.
If you're still struggling, you should perhaps take a step back from your computer and ask yourself what the EU might have done or might be pursuing that led to so many of your compatriots feeling so strongly and differently than you, rather than stating your own point of view, and demanding they, repeatedly, explain it for you.
Well said. Someone here yesterday depressingly claimed they didn't know any argument for Brexit. I thought we were meant to be the pig-headed side? I at least know the key arguments for remaining, even if I do passionately disagree ith them.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I don't expect that to happen. The EU runs a multilateral system. It isn't interested in offering a third party a say over that system. It won't change anything it does to accommodate the interests of that third party. Bilateralism is out. Now we can shadow the system on a unilateral basis but that doesn't get any commitment from the other party for stuff that we want and need. We only get that if the EU decides we are compliant. Which means following their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
He is though. He's never conceded any of his forecasts might be wrong, despite repeatedly embarrassing himself on here with them, and then simply moves onto the next.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
He's been pretty much spot on, like everyone else who realised a long time ago that any deal the UK gets with the EU will be done on the EU's terms because they are in a much stronger position than we are.
My Twitter has a lot of followers who remain very much alive!
The deal is not on the EU's terms and almost all our primary negotiating objectives have been achieved. He has not been spot on. And the EU is far weaker than you think. It needs the UK.
I unfollowed you because you are the most depressing and negative person on the internet. I can only assume others either reflexively agree with you, have hidden you out of politeness, or are otherwise dormant accounts.
Even Eeyore would want to escape his pen if he lived near you.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
Twas a month but what's a few weeks between parliamentary votes these days and I make no prognostication post Tuesday save May's Deal is dead.
We shall see.
I haven't followed the debate on PB over the past year as closely as previous issues and so apologise that I'm not fully informed as to your position. Do you believe May will win on Tuesday or that a slightly amended May plan will pass in the ensuing weeks?
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
And you said it repeatedly about Trump.
JackW is a clever man. But -- & it pains me to say it -- Trump was a cleverer man. He saw a way.
Who knows, maybe TMay is cleverer?
I think there was at least some polling evidence that Trump would do better than the consensus expected. Not sure if there's anything similar for Tessy's deal.
I suspect Tessy may do better than consensus too.
But did anyone in Europe actually seriously predict that Trump would win? I mean, did anyone sensible provide a well-argued, evidence-based case that Trump could win. (I know a few right-wing shouty crackers said Trump could win).
I am not criticising JackW. I also didn't expect in a million years that Trump would win.
Afaicr Wings Over Scotland suggested it was a serious possibility.
I'm not sure I do, either. Something I could never say in a professional environment in London, or I be dismissed.
We should be celebrating what unites and binds us in our local, regional and national communities, not emphasising and worshipping the differences, which invariably always boils down to the race/gender/sexuality kind - with personality, preference, politics, or family background, barely getting a look in - and simply encourages identity politics.
Identity politics matter because once you have been discriminated against for merely existing, then you tend to get worked up about it.
Suppose someone told you that you could not take out a mortgage because you were a man - get your wife to come down and sign the papers, or your mother, or your sister or some other female relative. You would explode with anger. Yet within living memory, many women had the mirror image of that experience.
Identity is all people have. It defines us. Everything else can be taken away from you. Our bodies and personalities are the only guaranteed possessions we have an ever changing world. They should not used to discriminate against us.
Holding onto past injustice forever is not a route to peace in the present. You say we only have our identity, but then you mention our bodies and personalities, which are quite different things.
Identity politics doesn’t lead anywhere. It is a war of all against all, forever.
No thanks.
It works both ways too.
We stayed.
The only real conclusion you can draw is let people be, and be careful not to take steps or actions that could make people feel their identity is threatened.
Well a big part of my British identity is a preference for pragmatism and common sense. The whole Brexit episode has been a huge blow to that.
But trming.
For God's sake grow a pair. Britain's identity is perfectly safe as part of a union of European countries.
For the Ultras they're already fearful about their version of Britain's identity being threatened within Britain & by the 21st Century. The EU is just a proxy.
It's a funny kind of British identity that needs to be preserved by taking action that is likely to mean the end of the UK as a single, sovereign entity.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
Twas a month but what's a few weeks between parliamentary votes these days and I make no prognostication post Tuesday save May's Deal is dead.
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
Thanks for that Malc.
I do have interest in Scots politics and do think Nicola has been compromised somewhat
I noticed with some amusement that she was simultaneously being accused of both conspiring against Salmond and colluding with him.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I don't expect that to happen. The EU runs a multilateral system. It isn't interested in offering a third party a say over that system. It won't change anything it does to accommodate the interests of that third party. Bilateralism is out. Now we can shadow the system on a unilateral basis but that doesn't get any commitment from the other party for stuff that we want and need. We only get that if the EU decides we are compliant. Which means following their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
He is though. He's never conceded any of his forecasts might be wrong, despite repeatedly embarrassing himself on here with them, and then simply moves onto the next.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
He's been pretty much spot on, like everyone else who realised a long time ago that any deal the UK gets with the EU will be done on the EU's terms because they are in a much stronger position than we are.
My Twitter has a lot of followers who remain very much alive!
The deal is not on the EU's terms and almost all our primary negotiating objectives have been achieved. He has not been spot on. And the EU is far weaker than you think. It needs the UK.
I unfollowed you because you are the most depressing and negative person on the internet. I can only assume others either reflexively agree with you, have hidden you out of politeness, or are otherwise dormant accounts.
Even Eeyore would want to escape his pen if he lived near you.
Not seen it yet on Marr, but seems Jezza has finally been flushed out as a Leaver and there is no way he will allow a 2nd vote.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
Not just Corbyn today. John Mann on Sky this morning said he will vote for TM deal and that labour will not agree another referendum, and Rebecca Long Bailey on the same programme said that if they win a GE they will campaign for a better Brexit
I didn’t see Marr.
But the Mirror writes it up as Corbyn refusing to rule out opposing Brexit in any GE.
Now there ain’t going to be a GE, so this is a theoretical on a theoretical, but I don’t see anything to suggest that Labour won’t support a People’s Vote.
There is no majority for a GE. There is no majority for May’s Deal. There is no majority for a permanent customs union (let’s call it “Corbyn’s deal”). There is certainly no majority for No Deal.
There *may* be a majority for “Norway plus”, deal, but I doubt it.
There likely is a majority for one of the deals above, contingent on a People’s Vote.
So in my view, unless tin-ear Tessy wants to relinquish control completely, she needs to figure out how to concede a People’s Vote in a way that keeps the Tory Party together.
In a way, it is a final can-kick for her, and it keeps her Deal on the table.
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
Thanks for that Malc.
I do have interest in Scots politics and do think Nicola has been compromised somewhat
I noticed with some amusement that she was simultaneously being accused of both conspiring against Salmond and colluding with him.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
Twas a month but what's a few weeks between parliamentary votes these days and I make no prognostication post Tuesday save May's Deal is dead.
We shall see.
I haven't followed the debate on PB over the past year as closely as previous issues and so apologise that I'm not fully informed as to your position. Do you believe May will win on Tuesday or that a slightly amended May plan will pass in the ensuing weeks?
Jack you have been very fortunate to miss that torture.
If we do have a GE, the Labour manifesto writer is going to have one hell of a time concocting a convoluted form of words on Brexit that means different things depending who is reading.
Good luck.
Having one manifesto is pre-internet thinking, they put different buttons on the website for [Remainer] and [Leaver] and just serve you the appropriate version.
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
Thanks for that Malc.
I do have interest in Scots politics and do think Nicola has been compromised somewhat
I noticed with some amusement that Sturgeon was simultaneously being accused of both conspiring against Salmond and colluding with him.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
And you said it repeatedly about Trump.
JackW is a clever man. But -- & it pains me to say it -- Trump was a cleverer man. He saw a way.
Who knows, maybe TMay is cleverer?
I think there was at least some polling evidence that Trump would do better than the consensus expected. Not sure if there's anything similar for Tessy's deal.
I suspect Tessy may do better than consensus too.
But did anyone in Europe actually seriously predict that Trump would win? I mean, did anyone sensible provide a well-argued, evidence-based case that Trump could win. (I know a few right-wing shouty crackers said Trump could win).
I am not criticising JackW. I also didn't expect in a million years that Trump would win.
I thought he would win, Clinton was discredited as well as garbage and he was crazy enough to do it given the atmosphere in USA.
The twitter feed is about transsexuals banned from public toilets, women of colour against the sex trade, rape trials in Worcestershire, domestic violence in Preston, missing teddies, lost dogs in Northampton, re-tweets of job adverts for third sector organisations.
I can find hardly anything about Wales (apart from an occasional retweet).
The twitter feed looks like she is much, much more interested in gender politics than Welsh politics.
The world that she inhabits is just so remote from the forgotten, desperate people in the grim, drug-addled Council estates in Llanelli that she represents.
No wonder Llanelli voted Leave.
I looked at the twitter feed and it is definitely from someone in Wales - you could not mistake it for a Scottish one, but if it is her personal feed rather than a Plaid one, then surely she has every right to highlight what is important to her. Welsh women suffer injustices too...
I'm not sure I do, either. Something I could never say in a professional environment in London, or I be dismissed.
We should be celebrating what unites and binds us in our local, regional and national communities, not emphasising and worshipping the differences, which invariably always boils down to the race/gender/sexuality kind - with personality, preference, politics, or family background, barely getting a look in - and simply encourages identity politics.
Identity politics matter because once you have been discriminated against for merely existing, then you tend to get worked up about it.
Suppose someone told you that you could not take out a mortgage because you were a man - get your wife to come down and sign the papers, or your mother, or your sister or some other female relative. You would explode with anger. Yet within living memory, many women had the mirror image of that experience.
Identity is all people have. It defines us. Everything else can be taken away from you. Our bodies and personalities are the only guaranteed possessions we have an ever changing world. They should not used to discriminate against us.
Holding onto past injustice forever is not a route to peace in the present. You say we only have our identity, but then you mention our bodies and personalities, which are quite different things.
Identity politics doesn’t lead anywhere. It is a war of all against all, forever.
No thanks.
It works both ways too.
We stayed.
The only real conclusion you can draw is let people be, and be careful not to take steps or actions that could make people feel their identity is threatened.
Well a big part of my British identity is a preference for pragmatism and common sense. The whole Brexit episode has been a huge blow to that.
But trming.
For God's sake grow a pair. Britain's identity is perfectly safe as part of a union of European countries.
For the Ultras they're already fearful about their version of Britain's identity being threatened within Britain & by the 21st Century. The EU is just a proxy.
It's a funny kind of British identity that needs to be preserved by taking action that is likely to mean the end of the UK as a single, sovereign entity.
I believe that many of them haven't managed the tricky but necessary partition of their British & English identities. It may have to be done for them.
I'm not sure I do, either. Something I could never say in a professional environment in London, or I be dismissed.
We should be celebrating what unites and binds us in our local, regional and national communities, not emphasising and worshipping the differences, which invariably always boils down to the race/gender/sexuality kind - with personality, preference, politics, or family background, barely getting a look in - and simply encourages identity politics.
Identity politics matter because once you have been discriminated against for merely existing, then you tend to get worked up about it.
Suppose someone told you that you could not take out a mortgage because you were a man - get your wife to come down and sign the papers, or your mother, or your sister or some other female relative. You would explode with anger. Yet within living memory, many women had the mirror image of that experience.
Identity is all people have. It defines us. Everything else can be taken away from you. Our bodies and personalities are the only guaranteed possessions we have an ever changing world. They should not used to discriminate against us.
Holding onto past injustice forever is not a route to peace in the present. You say we only have our identity, but then you mention our bodies and personalities, which are quite different things.
Identity politics doesn’t lead anywhere. It is a war of all against all, forever.
No thanks.
It works both ways too.
We voted Leave in large part because a number of us (myself included) felt our British identity was under threat if we stayed.
The only real conclusion you can draw is let people be, and be careful not to take steps or actions that could make people feel their identity is threatened.
Well a big part of my British identity is a preference for pragmatism and common sense. The whole Brexit episode has been a huge blow to that.
But that aside, how do you suppose that the EU is threatening our identity? It isn't as if our identity is some frail flower that needs a fence to protect it. Our language is used all over the world. Our universities are in the top league. We have a long and well documented history, and the likes of Shakespeare, Darwin and Newton command respect everywhere that people have got past subsistence farming.
For God's sake grow a pair. Britain's identity is perfectly safe as part of a union of European countries.
Absolutely right. What's more, for the vast majority of history Britain had a close involvement with Europe. It was only in Georgian and Victorian times that that involvement slackened.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
He is though. He's never conceded any of his forecasts might be wrong, despite repeatedly embarrassing himself on here with them, and then simply moves onto the next.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
He's been pretty much spot on, like everyone else who realised a long time ago that any deal the UK gets with the EU will be done on the EU's terms because they are in a much stronger position than we are.
My Twitter has a lot of followers who remain very much alive!
The deal is not on the EU's terms and almost all our primary negotiating objectives have been achieved. He has not been spot on. And the EU is far weaker than you think. It needs the UK.
I unfollowed you because you are the most depressing and negative person on the internet. I can only assume others either reflexively agree with you, have hidden you out of politeness, or are otherwise dormant accounts.
Even Eeyore would want to escape his pen if he lived near you.
Of course - we went into the negotiations determined to achieve a blind Brexit that could potentially tie us into a customs union with the EU forever while having absolutely no say in the way that it operates.
I am delighted to have added well over 1,000 Twitter followers in the last year, including MPs, columnists on national newspapers and a number from Spain. I agree that most will not see the world in the way you do.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Unfortunately, David doesn't seem to realise we'll never ever get to negotiating it unless the WA passes.
It has a max time-limit of 45 months - less than most care hire-purchase agreements - but the ERG morons can't see past it.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
I agree. I don't think it is negative. We need to be as closely aligned to the EU as our politics will allow. God save us from the delusions of the Bumbling Buccaneers.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
Yep, our choice will be to be as closely aligned to the EU as is politically possible because in reality we will have no other choice - especially in areas such as digital, finance and services which so easily cross national boundaries.
What utter drivel.
In many types of services (marketing, management consultancy etc) regulations are irrelevant. There is no way to stop a US company from commissioning a British one to draw up a marketing strategy. This is the case regardless of Brexit.
As for those that are governed by regulations, isn’t it remarkable that with the exception of financial services, the EU has done very little to promote a Single Market in services that is in any way as deep as the one for goods? A cynic might say it’s because those are the areas in which France and Germany do not have comparative advantage.
I consider regaining control over domestic financial regulation to be a fair exchange for passporting. The EU and ECB’s record during the financial crisis was dreadful, as set out in Adam Tooze’s superb history of it that has just been published.
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
Thanks for that Malc.
I do have interest in Scots politics and do think Nicola has been compromised somewhat
I noticed with some amusement that Sturgeon was simultaneously being accused of both conspiring against Salmond and colluding with him.
That is a very interesting post and goes some way to explaining the mystery that is the psyche of a Leaver. What is it that against the certainty that our society will deteriorate both socially and economically makes them want to leave? It's that it is a visceral fear and only visible to those who feel it.
It is called "Maintaining privilege" Roger. Those on top do not like competition and, given the display of "talent" from prominent Leavers, I would say that they have plenty to be worried about.
What remainers fail to understand is that "competition" in this case is just a race to the bottom. It is the old criticism of neo-liberal economics.
Unbridled competition depresses wages at the low end of the market and increases the gap between rich and poor. The rich with skills in high demand are highly mobile and can command a high salary wherever they go, while those without the requisite skills are left competing for low paid jobs, the worst houses, the bare minimum schools.
More importantly it is about opportunities - a middle class public schoolboy born in the South East will have access to far more opportunities than a working class kid born in Darlington and educated in the local comp.
Exposing our working class to untrammelled competition from the workers of much poorer countries in the form of freedom of movement may sound like a good idea from a macroeconomic perspective, but is a very poor idea from the perspective of those working class people who are left behind.
It is not about "maintaining privilege". Most of the people who voted to leave the EU would laugh in your smug, elitist face if you had the temerity to call them "privileged".
If we do have a GE, the Labour manifesto writer is going to have one hell of a time concocting a convoluted form of words on Brexit that means different things depending who is reading.
Good luck.
Having one manifesto is pre-internet thinking, they put different buttons on the website for [Remainer] and [Leaver] and just serve you the appropriate version.
good point. Or more likely just serve different Facebook ads depending on your profile.
Not seen it yet on Marr, but seems Jezza has finally been flushed out as a Leaver and there is no way he will allow a 2nd vote.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
Not just Corbyn today. John Mann on Sky this morning said he will vote for TM deal and that labour will not agree another referendum, and Rebecca Long Bailey on the same programme said that if they win a GE they will campaign for a better Brexit
I didn’t see Marr.
But the Mirror writes it up as Corbyn refusing to rule out opposing Brexit in any GE.
Now there ain’t going to be a GE, so this is a theoretical on a theoretical, but I don’t see anything to suggest that Labour won’t support a People’s Vote.
There is no majority for a GE. There is no majority for May’s Deal. There is no majority for a permanent customs union (let’s call it “Corbyn’s deal”). There is certainly no majority for No Deal.
There *may* be a majority for “Norway plus”, deal, but I doubt it.
There likely is a majority for one of the deals above, contingent on a People’s Vote.
So in my view, unless tin-ear Tessy wants to relinquish control completely, she needs to figure out how to concede a People’s Vote in a way that keeps the Tory Party together.
In a way, it is a final can-kick for her, and it keeps her Deal on the table.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I don't expect that to happen. The EU runs a multilateral system. It isn't interested in offering a third party a say over that system. It won't change anything it does to accommodate the interests of that third party. Bilateralism is out. Now we can shadow the system on a unilateral basis but that doesn't get any commitment from the other party for stuff that we want and need. We only get that if the EU decides we are compliant. Which means following their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
We disagree, Casino, that's all. For my part, I respect that you put forward a concrete positive case for Brexit. At the risk of patronising further, that's rare amongst Leavers.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Unfortunately, David doesn't seem to realise we'll never ever get to negotiating it unless the WA passes.
It has a max time-limit of 45 months - less than most care hire-purchase agreements - but the ERG morons can't see past it.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
I agree. I don't think it is negative. We need to be as closely aligned to the EU as our politics will allow. God save us from the delusions of the Bumbling Buccaneers.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
Yep, boundaries.
What utter drivel.
In many types of services (marketing, management consultancy etc) regulations are irrelevant. There is no way to stop a US company from commissioning a British one to draw up a marketing strategy. This is the case regardless of Brexit.
As for those that are governed by regulations, isn’t it remarkable that with the exception of financial services, the EU has done very little to promote a Single Market in services that is in any way as deep as the one for goods? A cynic might say it’s because those are the areas in which France and Germany do not have comparative advantage.
I consider regaining control over domestic financial regulation to be a fair exchange for passporting. The EU and ECB’s record during the financial crisis was dreadful, as set out in Adam Tooze’s superb history of it that has just been published.
There is plenty to stop those employed by a UK company from going to the US and working on a marketing or management consultancy project for a US client. There is nothing to stop those same UK employees going to the European mainland and working on projects for European clients currently. There will be soon, though.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
And you said it repeatedly about Trump.
JackW is a clever man. But -- & it pains me to say it -- Trump was a cleverer man. He saw a way.
Who knows, maybe TMay is cleverer?
I think there was at least some polling evidence that Trump would do better than the consensus expected. Not sure if there's anything similar for Tessy's deal.
JackW being wrong on Trump relied on systematic polling error across the rust belt.
The mistake he and I made was that the chance of systematic polling error across the rust belt states was not independent for each state but would be correlated - if one state was off they would all be off.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
Twas a month but what's a few weeks between parliamentary votes these days and I make no prognostication post Tuesday save May's Deal is dead.
We shall see.
I haven't followed the debate on PB over the past year as closely as previous issues and so apologise that I'm not fully informed as to your position. Do you believe May will win on Tuesday or that a slightly amended May plan will pass in the ensuing weeks?
Jack you have been very fortunate to miss that torture.
Perhaps so but others joys too .... your own treatise on SNP policy divergence on root vegetable exports to Outer Mongolia passed me by. I've have suffered ....
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I don't expect that to happen. The EU runs a multilateral system. It isn't interested in offering a third party a say over that system. It won't change anything it does to accommodate the interests of that third party. Bilateralism is out. Now we can shadow the system on a unilateral basis but that doesn't get any commitment from the other party for stuff that we want and need. We only get that if the EU decides we are compliant. Which means following their rules.
Yes, and you're another EU ideologue who always take the most europhile interpretation of any possible situation and future development. You did so over the citizens agreement, WA, future political agreement, and are now doing so over the long-term relationship.
Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
We disagree, Casino, that's all. For my part, I respect that you put forward a concrete positive case for Brexit. At the risk of patronising further, that's rare amongst Leavers.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I their rules.
Y Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
He is though. He's never conceded any of his forecasts might be wrong, despite repeatedly embarrassing himself on here with them, and then simply moves onto the next.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
He's been pretty much spot on, like everyone else who realised a long time ago that any deal the UK gets with the EU will be done on the EU's terms because they are in a much stronger position than we are.
My Twitter has a lot of followers who remain very much alive!
The deal is not on the EU's terms and almost all our primary negotiating objectives have been achieved. He has not been spot on. And the EU is far weaker than you think. It needs the UK.
I unfollowed you because you are the most depressing and negative person on the internet. I can only assume others either reflexively agree with you, have hidden you out of politeness, or are otherwise dormant accounts.
Even Eeyore would want to escape his pen if he lived near you.
Of course - we went into the negotiations determined to achieve a blind Brexit that could potentially tie us into a customs union with the EU forever while having absolutely no say in the way that it operates.
I am delighted to have added well over 1,000 Twitter followers in the last year, including MPs, columnists on national newspapers and a number from Spain. I agree that most will not see the world in the way you do.
The Swiss clinics will be doing good business this year, then.
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
Twas a month but what's a few weeks between parliamentary votes these days and I make no prognostication post Tuesday save May's Deal is dead.
We shall see.
I haven't followed the debate on PB over the past year as closely as previous issues and so apologise that I'm not fully informed as to your position. Do you believe May will win on Tuesday or that a slightly amended May plan will pass in the ensuing weeks?
Not seen it yet on Marr, but seems Jezza has finally been flushed out as a Leaver and there is no way he will allow a 2nd vote.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
Not just Corbyn today. John Mann on Sky this morning said he will vote for TM deal and that labour will not agree another referendum, and Rebecca Long Bailey on the same programme said that if they win a GE they will campaign for a better Brexit
I didn’t see Marr.
But the Mirror writes it up as Corbyn refusing to rule out opposing Brexit in any GE.
Now there ain’t going to be a GE, so this is a theoretical on a theoretical, but I don’t see anything to suggest that Labour won’t support a People’s Vote.
There is no majority for a GE. There is no majority for May’s Deal. There is no majority for a permanent customs union (let’s call it “Corbyn’s deal”). There is certainly no majority for No Deal.
There *may* be a majority for “Norway plus”, deal, but I doubt it.
There likely is a majority for one of the deals above, contingent on a People’s Vote.
So in my view, unless tin-ear Tessy wants to relinquish control completely, she needs to figure out how to concede a People’s Vote in a way that keeps the Tory Party together.
In a way, it is a final can-kick for her, and it keeps her Deal on the table.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
There's going to be a hell of fight within Labour over GE 2022 manifesto, if we do actually leave via May's deal or something close.
Rejoin will be what many of the membership will be pushing for I would have thought.
You say closely-aligned (partly to troll me and other Leavers) and what you mean is cloning our laws to maintain close alignment, with no say.
I disagree. I expect close alignment by choice in goods and probably agriculture, with an agreed minimum floor of social/employment and state aid laws, but divergence in services, digital and finance, and greater latitude to interpret the boundaries of the former laws as well.
Our country. Our choice.
I their rules.
Y Your objective is always the same: to render any argument for Brexit pointless, so we Remain, which is your agenda.
And you are always wrong.
I do enjoy your complete lack of self-awareness, Mr Royale :-D
He is though. He's never conceded any of his forecasts might be wrong, despite repeatedly embarrassing himself on here with them, and then simply moves onto the next.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
He's been pretty much spot on, like everyone else who realised a long time ago that any deal the UK gets with the EU will be done on the EU's terms because they are in a much stronger position than we are.
My Twitter has a lot of followers who remain very much alive!
The deal is not on the EU's terms and almost all our primary negotiating objectives have been achieved. He has not been spot on. And the EU is far weaker than you think. It needs the UK.
I unfollowed you because you are the most depressing and negative person on the internet. I can only assume others either reflexively agree with you, have hidden you out of politeness, or are otherwise dormant accounts.
Even Eeyore would want to escape his pen if he lived near you.
Of course - we went into the negotiations determined to achieve a blind Brexit that could potentially tie us into a customs union with the EU forever while having absolutely no say in the way that it operates.
I am delighted to have added well over 1,000 Twitter followers in the last year, including MPs, columnists on national newspapers and a number from Spain. I agree that most will not see the world in the way you do.
The Swiss clinics will be doing good business this year, then.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
I agree. I don't think it is negative. We need to be as closely aligned to the EU as our politics will allow. God save us from the delusions of the Bumbling Buccaneers.
Yep, boundaries.
What utter drivel.
In many types of services (marketing, management consultancy etc) regulations are irrelevant. There is no way to stop a US company from commissioning a British one to draw up a marketing strategy. This is the case regardless of Brexit.
As for those that are governed by regulations, isn’t it remarkable that with the exception of financial services, the EU has done very little to promote a Single Market in services that is in any way as deep as the one for goods? A cynic might say it’s because those are the areas in which France and Germany do not have comparative advantage.
I consider regaining control over domestic financial regulation to be a fair exchange for passporting. The EU and ECB’s record during the financial crisis was dreadful, as set out in Adam Tooze’s superb history of it that has just been published.
There is plenty to stop those employed by a UK company from going to the US and working on a marketing or management consultancy project for a US client. There is nothing to stop those same UK employees going to the European mainland and working on projects for European clients currently. There will be soon, though.
Plenty eh? Care to be more specific? One doesn’t need a visa to go to the USA for a business trip, and as it’s 2018 there’s no need to be on sight with the client for 90% of the time.
Let’s try another one. Let’s say I’m a YouTuber with a Patreon account which US and Japanese citizens pay into. What aspect of our EU membership would impinge on this arrangement?
Not much point in me trying to lean on Dr. Sarah Wollaston.....
The ERG should take the May Deal - but with their support contingent on her stating she will be stepping down on 1st June, allowing time for a new leader to be installed in the meantime. A new leader who can undertake negotiating the trade deal. And - if the members so choose - one who has said they will walk away from the Withdrawal Agreement, if needs be. But that would at least be after a period of planning for such walk away.
The reputational hit internationally in doing so might be real, but probably far less painful than suffering a No Deal Brexit that has been inadequately planned for.
Even with most of the ERG on board the May Deal will not pass the HoC. It's a lost cause ... The End.
You said that about the Leave vote in the referendum two weeks out.
Twas a month but what's a few weeks between parliamentary votes these days and I make no prognostication post Tuesday save May's Deal is dead.
We shall see.
I haven't followed the debate on PB over the past year as closely as previous issues and so apologise that I'm not fully informed as to your position. Do you believe May will win on Tuesday or that a slightly amended May plan will pass in the ensuing weeks?
Not seen it yet on Marr, but seems Jezza has finally been flushed out as a Leaver and there is no way he will allow a 2nd vote.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
Not just Corbyn today. John Mann on Sky this morning said he will vote for TM deal and that labour will not agree another referendum, and Rebecca Long Bailey on the same programme said that if they win a GE they will campaign for a better Brexit
I didn’t see Marr.
But the Mirror writes it up as Corbyn refusing to rule out opposing Brexit in any GE.
Now there ain’t going to be a GE, so this is a theoretical on a theoretical, but I don’t see anything to suggest that Labour won’t support a People’s Vote.
There is no majority for a GE. There is no majority for May’s Deal. There is no majority for a permanent customs union (let’s call it “Corbyn’s deal”). There is certainly no majority for No Deal.
There *may* be a majority for “Norway plus”, deal, but I doubt it.
There likely is a majority for one of the deals above, contingent on a People’s Vote.
So in my view, unless tin-ear Tessy wants to relinquish control completely, she needs to figure out how to concede a People’s Vote in a way that keeps the Tory Party together.
In a way, it is a final can-kick for her, and it keeps her Deal on the table.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
I agree. I don't think it is negative. We need to be as closely aligned to the EU as our politics will allow. God save us from the delusions of the Bumbling Buccaneers.
Yep, boundaries.
What utter drivel.
In many types of services (marketing, management consultancy etc) regulations are irrelevant. There is no way to stop a US company from commissioning a British one to draw up a marketing strategy. This is the case regardless of Brexit.
As advantage.
I consider regaining control over domestic financial regulation to be a fair exchange for passporting. The EU and ECB’s record during the financial crisis was dreadful, as set out in Adam Tooze’s superb history of it that has just been published.
There is plenty to stop those employed by a UK company from going to the US and working on a marketing or management consultancy project for a US client. There is nothing to stop those same UK employees going to the European mainland and working on projects for European clients currently. There will be soon, though.
Plenty eh? Care to be more specific? One doesn’t need a visa to go to the USA for a business trip, and as it’s 2018 there’s no need to be on sight with the client for 90% of the time.
Let’s try another one. Let’s say I’m a YouTuber with a Patreon account which US and Japanese citizens pay into. What aspect of our EU membership would impinge on this arrangement?
Possibly GDPR.
But I think you have a very restricted view of what services are. Try this:
Absolutely right. What's more, for the vast majority of history Britain had a close involvement with Europe. It was only in Georgian and Victorian times that that involvement slackened.
That close involvement usually involved swords, cannon or pike. Not sure that is the sort of thing you should be promoting.
Besides, Leave get accused of wanting to take us back to the 1950s. Do you really want to take us back to the 1750s?
Absolutely right. What's more, for the vast majority of history Britain had a close involvement with Europe. It was only in Georgian and Victorian times that that involvement slackened.
That close involvement usually involved swords, cannon or pike. Not sure that is the sort of thing you should be promoting.
Besides, Leave get accused of wanting to take us back to the 1950s. Do you really want to take us back to the 1750s?
You do post some rubbish sometimes.
Apropos of the chances of the youth from the Darlington comp, Sadly, 'twas ever thus, and I suspect will not change as a result of Brexit. In fact the position may well be worsened.
Indeed, what would the Conservative position be in such an election, is a question that is equally relevant.
It is hard to see chunks of both the large parties being able to fight on their own party platform. OK, there were a fair few that got away with it last time, but an election in current circumstances would surely feel very different.
Indeed, what would the Conservative position be in such an election, is a question that is equally relevant.
It is hard to see chunks of both the large parties being able to fight on their own party platform. OK, there were a fair few that got away with it last time, but an election in current circumstances would surely feel very different.
A GE now would be Brexit election. Nothing else. Despite Jezza's efforts to talk about anything but.
What is the current price on Mays deal passing in parliament this Tuesday ?
13.5 on BF
Much appreciated for some reason could not seem to find it.
Those who want to make more interest on some savings overnight might like to consider the 4% on offer via BF if May's deal does not pass next week.
Obviously there is an element of risk. MPs may come back from their constituencies tomorrow and suddenly decide to back her after all.
I'm so skint at the moment, that I can't take even this tiny risk. But otherwise...
Strictly speaking the 4% on offer on BF is not on her deal passing on Tuesday. You would also be taking the risk that she does not decide to pull the vote again and that it passes when re-introduced again say, a few days later after some last minute alterations.
What is the current price on Mays deal passing in parliament this Tuesday ?
13.5 on BF
Much appreciated for some reason could not seem to find it.
Those who want to make more interest on some savings overnight might like to consider the 4% on offer via BF if May's deal does not pass next week.
Obviously there is an element of risk. MPs may come back from their constituencies tomorrow and suddenly decide to back her after all.
I'm so skint at the moment, that I can't take even this tiny risk. But otherwise...
Strictly speaking the 4% on offer on BF is not on her deal passing on Tuesday. You would also be taking the risk that she does not decide to pull the vote again and that it passes when re-introduced again say, a few days later after some last minute alterations.
Yes, good points. It is based on the first vote on the MV. Whenever that takes place.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Unfortunately, David doesn't seem to realise we'll never ever get to negotiating it unless the WA passes.
It has a max time-limit of 45 months - less than most care hire-purchase agreements - but the ERG morons can't see past it.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
The backstop is a massive red herring. Both the UK and the EU know they've f*cked this up, and it's in neither's interests for it to continue.
I fully expected it to be superseded by a new FTA in 2021 or 2022 that will include our formal exit from the customs union, with a level of special rules for NI, and close customs cooperation between the UK and EU thereafter.
You are the one totally missing the point. If we were all confident the FTA would be in effect then there would be no problem. Nobody is objecting that strenuously to a transition. It is the permanent backstop that is the problem and there is no time limit on that.
You and Mr Nabavi claim the EU don't want the backstop to be permanent but given the upset it is causing here they could resolve that by not making it permanent. They haven't. Judge by deeds not words and the deeds are that they have moved heaven and earth to screw out of us a permanent backstop from which there is no time limit and no unilateral escape.
You do know the EU didn't want the backstop to apply to the whole of the UK, don't you? And that they view this as "cherrypicking" because we get full customs alignment totally for free, and with no free movement on people on top?
Customs alignment isn't tied to free movement. Turkey has customs alignment but no free movement.
I voted to end customs alignment. Even EFTA would achieve that but the backstop doesn't.
And, that will come, once we've negotiated a final FTA.
It's very obvious it's a red line for this Conservative Government.
No it isn't obvious. It can't be a red line if they've signed the backstop into international law. That traps us into their customs arrangements forever.
And, this is what is ultimately going to do for Brexit. There are too few rational and pragmatic Brexiteers.
The ideologues will cry betrayal, whatever deal we have a realistic change of striking and say we'll be a lapdog, and better off staying than this or a full no-deal. So will the Remainers, who'll always say we'll be a lapdog argue we'd be better off staying with the votes and influence.
So the easiest path is for Brexit to be rescinded, and the former to make a career out of betrayal and the latter to be hated and lauded in equal measure.
Great.
Better than being a colony of the EU subject in perpetuity to its laws but not getting a say.
I voted Leave to take back control not give it away. The backstop is 100% incompatible with that pledge. The only solution is to drop the backstop or pretend it doesn't exist. You may be prepared to do the latter but I'm not.
I think you (like many Leavers) hugely overstate the importance of the backstop and have become blinkered by it. We will in sense at all be a 'colony', and reducing arguments to such emotive rhetoric is as inaccurate as it is unhelpful.
The future political agreement gets us out of 80% of the single market, guarantees our right to do our trade deals, ends free movement, ends jurisdiction of the ECJ, ends major budgetary contributions, and repatriates fisheries, agriculture and regional policy, whilst also allowing for close defence and security cooperation on a bilateral basis with Europe in future.
Had that been on the table three years ago, I'd have bitten your hand off.
Which single market rules will cease to apply while still in the backstop without creating a regulatory border in the Irish Sea? What trade deals can be made while in the backstop without creating a customs border in the Irish Sea.
Those benefits you claim are negated by the backstop which is why it is so toxic.
Not seen it yet on Marr, but seems Jezza has finally been flushed out as a Leaver and there is no way he will allow a 2nd vote.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
Not just Corbyn today. John Mann on Sky this morning said he will vote for TM deal and that labour will not agree another referendum, and Rebecca Long Bailey on the same programme said that if they win a GE they will campaign for a better Brexit
I didn’t see Marr.
But the Mirror writes it up as Corbyn refusing to rule out opposing Brexit in any GE.
Now there ain’t going to be a GE, so this is a theoretical on a theoretical, but I don’t see anything to suggest that Labour won’t support a People’s Vote.
There is no majority for a GE. There is no majority for May’s Deal. There is no majority for a permanent customs union (let’s call it “Corbyn’s deal”). There is certainly no majority for No Deal.
There *may* be a majority for “Norway plus”, deal, but I doubt it.
There likely is a majority for one of the deals above, contingent on a People’s Vote.
So in my view, unless tin-ear Tessy wants to relinquish control completely, she needs to figure out how to concede a People’s Vote in a way that keeps the Tory Party together.
In a way, it is a final can-kick for her, and it keeps her Deal on the table.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
Yes, both parties face big problems
If Brexit is derailed the next election will be interesting with some unusual results I think.
What is the current price on Mays deal passing in parliament this Tuesday ?
13.5 on BF
Much appreciated for some reason could not seem to find it.
Those who want to make more interest on some savings overnight might like to consider the 4% on offer via BF if May's deal does not pass next week.
Obviously there is an element of risk. MPs may come back from their constituencies tomorrow and suddenly decide to back her after all.
I'm so skint at the moment, that I can't take even this tiny risk. But otherwise...
Strictly speaking the 4% on offer on BF is not on her deal passing on Tuesday. You would also be taking the risk that she does not decide to pull the vote again and that it passes when re-introduced again say, a few days later after some last minute alterations.
Yes, good points. It is based on the first vote on the MV. Whenever that takes place.
Which might be never frankly!
If not by 30th March, then market becomes void.
But given May's previous form on pulling the MV at the last minute, then I think I would prefer to be a layer rather than betting on such skinny odds.
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
I think the SNP has a choice to a certain extent of whether it wants to be a revolutionary movement or the lightly nationalist establishment party of power. The Fianna Fáil of Scotland. Salmond seemed ambiguous; Sturgeon seems to favour the latter. Mrs Sturgeon has the advantage over any potential rivals of being the person Central Casting would come up with when tasked with finding the representative of Middle Scotland. It will take a lot to shift her.
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
I think the SNP has a choice to a certain of whether it wants to be a revolutionary movement or the lightly nationalist establishment party of power. The Fianna Fáil of Scotland. Salmond seemed ambiguous; Sturgeon seems to favour the latter. Mrs Sturgeon has the advantage over any potential rivals of being the person Central Casting would come up with when tasked with finding the representative of Middle Scotland. It will take a lot to shift her.
If she does not do something about ref 2 in this parliament I think she will be done for.
Indeed, what would the Conservative position be in such an election, is a question that is equally relevant.
It is hard to see chunks of both the large parties being able to fight on their own party platform. OK, there were a fair few that got away with it last time, but an election in current circumstances would surely feel very different.
A GE now would be Brexit election. Nothing else. Despite Jezza's efforts to talk about anything but.
That's what was said in 2017.
General Elections have a life of their own. If people want to talk about something else they can do so.
Indeed, what would the Conservative position be in such an election, is a question that is equally relevant.
It is hard to see chunks of both the large parties being able to fight on their own party platform. OK, there were a fair few that got away with it last time, but an election in current circumstances would surely feel very different.
A GE now would be Brexit election. Nothing else. Despite Jezza's efforts to talk about anything but.
Agreed, it would be a Brexit election.
But I am curious as to what PB Tories think their Brexit manifesto position would be if it came to a GE taking place in the next month or so. Would they try and ditch May, if she decides to cling on? If they stick with May, would there manifesto be a reflection of her current position, putting us all back to square one if they do win a very small majority or form another minority government? What are the alternatives?
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
I think the SNP has a choice to a certain of whether it wants to be a revolutionary movement or the lightly nationalist establishment party of power. The Fianna Fáil of Scotland. Salmond seemed ambiguous; Sturgeon seems to favour the latter. Mrs Sturgeon has the advantage over any potential rivals of being the person Central Casting would come up with when tasked with finding the representative of Middle Scotland. It will take a lot to shift her.
If she does not do something about ref 2 in this parliament I think she will be done for.
Very probably done for if she does, and loses. Which may affect Mrs Sturgeon's thinking. But take your point.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
Yes, both parties face big problems
If Brexit is derailed the next election will be interesting with some unusual results I think.
Note:
1. Cancellation of Brexit, or a Norwegian settlement, is only likely to occur in circumstances that lead to a General Election later in the year 2. Whilst not absolutely certain, it seems very likely that Theresa May would finally resign as Tory leader if she were deposed by Parliament as Prime Minister, which is what cancellation implies 3. The Conservative Party will then be captured by Brexit: I don't suggest that the next leader will come from the ERG, but they will need the backing of the party membership which is strongly in favour of the concept and will be furious at having been thwarted to boot 4. Therefore, the Tories will go into a General Election as the party of Leave, versus Labour as the party of Remain, with highly unpredictable consequences. And, unlike in a referendum, it takes a lot less than 50%+1 of the vote to win a General Election outright
The pro-EU majority in Parliament might be able to forge a new settlement on Europe that is to their liking - but making it stick might not be so smart and easy.
This may end up playing significantly in future elections.
Unfortunately, David doesn't seem to realise we'll never ever get to negotiating it unless the WA passes.
It has a max time-limit of 45 months - less than most care hire-purchase agreements - but the ERG morons can't see past it.
Theres a time limit on the backstop? I wasnt aware of that. Are you 100% sure?
Or do you mean any "benefits" we get from the agreement are time limited while the backstop is in perpetuity?
The backstop is a massive red herring. Both the UK and the EU know they've f*cked this up, and it's in neither's interests for it to continue.
I fully expected it to be superseded by a new FTA in 2021 or 2022 that will include our formal exit from the customs union, with a level of special rules for NI, and close customs cooperation between the UK and EU thereafter.
You are the one totally missing the point. If we were all confident the FTA would be in effect then there would be no problem. Nobody is objecting that strenuously to a transition. It is the permanent backstop that is the problem and there is no time limit on that.
You and Mr Nabavi claim the EU don't want the backstop to be permanent but given the upset it is causing here they could resolve that by not making it permanent. They haven't. Judge by deeds not words and the deeds are that they have moved heaven and earth to screw out of us a permanent backstop from which there is no time limit and no unilateral escape.
You do know the EU didn't want the backstop to apply to the whole of the UK, don't you? And that they view this as "cherrypicking" because we get full customs alignment totally for free, and with no free movement on people on top?
Customs alignment isn't tied to free movement. Turkey has customs alignment but no free movement.
I voted to end customs alignment. Even EFTA would achieve that but the backstop doesn't.
And, that will come, once we've negotiated a final FTA.
It's very obvious it's a red line for this Conservative Government.
No it isn't obvious. It can't be a red line if they've signed the backstop into international law. That traps us into their customs arrangements forever.
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
I think the SNP has a choice to a certain extent of whether it wants to be a revolutionary movement or the lightly nationalist establishment party of power. The Fianna Fáil of Scotland. Salmond seemed ambiguous; Sturgeon seems to favour the latter. Mrs Sturgeon has the advantage over any potential rivals of being the person Central Casting would come up with when tasked with finding the representative of Middle Scotland. It will take a lot to shift her.
Otoh this is yet another battle in the geopolitical war between light and dark. Apparently.
Not seen it yet on Marr, but seems Jezza has finally been flushed out as a Leaver and there is no way he will allow a 2nd vote.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
Not just Corbyn today. John Mann on Sky this morning said he will vote for TM deal and that labour will not agree another referendum, and Rebecca Long Bailey on the same programme said that if they win a GE they will campaign for a better Brexit
I didn’t see Marr.
But the Mirror writes it up as Corbyn refusing to rule out opposing Brexit in any GE.
Now there ain’t going to be a GE, so this is a theoretical on a theoretical, but I don’t see anything to suggest that Labour won’t support a People’s Vote.
There is no majority for a GE. There is no majority for May’s Deal. There is no majority for a permanent customs union (let’s call it “Corbyn’s deal”). There is certainly no majority for No Deal.
There *may* be a majority for “Norway plus”, deal, but I doubt it.
There likely is a majority for one of the deals above, contingent on a People’s Vote.
So in my view, unless tin-ear Tessy wants to relinquish control completely, she needs to figure out how to concede a People’s Vote in a way that keeps the Tory Party together.
In a way, it is a final can-kick for her, and it keeps her Deal on the table.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
Yes, both parties face big problems
If Brexit is derailed the next election will be interesting with some unusual results I think.
For the first time in my lifetime (and probably for a ong time before that), the personal manifesto of the candidate will be more important than the Party.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
Yes, both parties face big problems
If Brexit is derailed the next election will be interesting with some unusual results I think.
Note:
1. Cancellation of Brexit, or a Norwegian settlement, is only likely to occur in circumstances that lead to a General Election later in the year 2. Whilst not absolutely certain, it seems very likely that Theresa May would finally resign as Tory leader if she were deposed by Parliament as Prime Minister, which is what cancellation implies 3. The Conservative Party will then be captured by Brexit: I don't suggest that the next leader will come from the ERG, but they will need the backing of the party membership which is strongly in favour of the concept and will be furious at having been thwarted to boot 4. Therefore, the Tories will go into a General Election as the party of Leave, versus Labour as the party of Remain, with highly unpredictable consequences. And, unlike in a referendum, it takes a lot less than 50%+1 of the vote to win a General Election outright
The pro-EU majority in Parliament might be able to forge a new settlement on Europe that is to their liking - but making it stick might not be so smart and easy.
You seem to be assuming TMay wouldn't let parliament pass a deal vs remain referendum. I don't know how you'd know that - nobody seems to know what TMay will do if/when her deal is defeated. I'm not sure TMay knows.
If there's a referendum and Remain wins then she can rule until 2027.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
Yes, both parties face big problems
If Brexit is derailed the next election will be interesting with some unusual results I think.
Note:
1. Cancellation of Brexit, or a Norwegian settlement, is only likely to occur in circumstances that lead to a General Election later in the year 2. Whilst not absolutely certain, it seems very likely that Theresa May would finally resign as Tory leader if she were deposed by Parliament as Prime Minister, which is what cancellation implies 3. The Conservative Party will then be captured by Brexit: I don't suggest that the next leader will come from the ERG, but they will need the backing of the party membership which is strongly in favour of the concept and will be furious at having been thwarted to boot 4. Therefore, the Tories will go into a General Election as the party of Leave, versus Labour as the party of Remain, with highly unpredictable consequences. And, unlike in a referendum, it takes a lot less than 50%+1 of the vote to win a General Election outright
The pro-EU majority in Parliament might be able to forge a new settlement on Europe that is to their liking - but making it stick might not be so smart and easy.
You seem to be assuming TMay wouldn't let parliament pass a deal vs remain referendum. I don't know how you'd know that - nobody seems to know what TMay will do if/when her deal is defeated. I'm not sure TMay knows.
If there's a referendum and Remain wins then she can rule until 2027.
Presumably the margin of defeat will be what drives May's next move,if she hasn't considered different options for different levels of defeat that would seem somewhat foolish.
I do understand your views but everything said this morning, including just now on Sky news announcing Corbyn rejects a referendum, is the problem for labour and likely to cause a split for themselves
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
Yes, both parties face big problems
If Brexit is derailed the next election will be interesting with some unusual results I think.
Note:
1. Cancellation of Brexit, or a Norwegian settlement, is only likely to occur in circumstances that lead to a General Election later in the year 2. Whilst not absolutely certain, it seems very likely that Theresa May would finally resign as Tory leader if she were deposed by Parliament as Prime Minister, which is what cancellation implies 3. The Conservative Party will then be captured by Brexit: I don't suggest that the next leader will come from the ERG, but they will need the backing of the party membership which is strongly in favour of the concept and will be furious at having been thwarted to boot 4. Therefore, the Tories will go into a General Election as the party of Leave, versus Labour as the party of Remain, with highly unpredictable consequences. And, unlike in a referendum, it takes a lot less than 50%+1 of the vote to win a General Election outright
The pro-EU majority in Parliament might be able to forge a new settlement on Europe that is to their liking - but making it stick might not be so smart and easy.
You seem to be assuming TMay wouldn't let parliament pass a deal vs remain referendum. I don't know how you'd know that - nobody seems to know what TMay will do if/when her deal is defeated. I'm not sure TMay knows.
If there's a referendum and Remain wins then she can rule until 2027.
Equally fundamentally he assumes that Labour can overcome the handicap of its leader and be credible as the Remain party.
In many types of services (marketing, management consultancy etc) regulations are irrelevant. There is no way to stop a US company from commissioning a British one to draw up a marketing strategy. This is the case regardless of Brexit.
As for those that are governed by regulations, isn’t it remarkable that with the exception of financial services, the EU has done very little to promote a Single Market in services that is in any way as deep as the one for goods? A cynic might say it’s because those are the areas in which France and Germany do not have comparative advantage.
I consider regaining control over domestic financial regulation to be a fair exchange for passporting. The EU and ECB’s record during the financial crisis was dreadful, as set out in Adam Tooze’s superb history of it that has just been published.
Leaving the Single Market will see the UK lose Mode 4 services (presence of natural persons), which will affect supply of business services and Mode 2 services (consumption abroad), which become Mode 3 (commercial presence) instead, with the loss of employment and tax revenues, particularly affecting financial services.
IIRC a study estimated the UK would lose about half its services exports to the EU.
The twitter feed is about transsexuals banned from public toilets, women of colour against the sex trade, rape trials in Worcestershire, domestic violence in Preston, missing teddies, lost dogs in Northampton, re-tweets of job adverts for third sector organisations.
I can find hardly anything about Wales (apart from an occasional retweet).
The twitter feed looks like she is much, much more interested in gender politics than Welsh politics.
The world that she inhabits is just so remote from the forgotten, desperate people in the grim, drug-addled Council estates in Llanelli that she represents.
No wonder Llanelli voted Leave.
I looked at the twitter feed and it is definitely from someone in Wales - you could not mistake it for a Scottish one, but if it is her personal feed rather than a Plaid one, then surely she has every right to highlight what is important to her. Welsh women suffer injustices too...
She can of course highlight whatever she wants, (whether it is her personal or her professional twitter feed).
I just don't think it is the twitter feed of someone who is interested in Welsh nationalism, or Llanelli, or Caerfyrddin, or even Wales really.
The twitter feed reads like the social work department of a international third-sector charity. She churns out a complete catalogue of vacuous jargon, divisive identitarian nit-picking and Pollyanna platitudes. On none of the issues does she have any particular profound or personal insight.
Llanelli is a desperately poor place -- why is she not concerned about drugs on the Pen Y Fan Council Estate? Or the emerging scandal of the Wellness Village in Burry Port ? Would you not expect her to have some insight into these questions? Apparently not.
Not uncoincidentally, Plaid Cymru has gone backwards at any alarming pace in Llanelli (a seat they once held in the Welsh Assembly).
It is not about "maintaining privilege". Most of the people who voted to leave the EU would laugh in your smug, elitist face if you had the temerity to call them "privileged".
Compared to those coming here, people at any level in Britain are privileged, and let us face it, it was immigration - those nasty forriners (particularly the whole of Turkey) - that swung it for Leave. Even the Leave coordinators admitted that they used immigration as a frightener.
You seem to be assuming TMay wouldn't let parliament pass a deal vs remain referendum. I don't know how you'd know that - nobody seems to know what TMay will do if/when her deal is defeated. I'm not sure TMay knows.
If there's a referendum and Remain wins then she can rule until 2027.
At this stage one can obviously be certain of practically nothing. However, I very much doubt if Parliament, following the anticipated crushing defeat for the Deal, would try to put it to the people. There might not be a referendum if the cross-party alliance takes control of proceedings (they might decide that the least impractical option is revocation,) but if there is then it'd probably be BINO (Norway+CU, or something very like it, assuming that this were to be offered by the EU) versus Remain.
Given that the Deal essentially represents nearly all of May's work as Prime Minister, I don't see how she benefits from allowing that to proceed. Consequently, she has no incentive to cooperate. Why voluntarily reduce yourself to the status of a puppet and a human shield for other people's alternative solutions which you profoundly disagree with and do not want?
Therefore, if the reports in the Sunday Times are anything like accurate, and the Tory Hard Remainer faction intends to seize control of the Parliamentary machinery with the co-operation of Bercow and leading Opposition figures, then May could have nothing left to lose by resigning as Prime Minister.
If the Tory party were then to stick together as a unit on confidence then, given the position of the DUP, an alternative Government could not be formed and a General Election would follow, which would most likely function as a proxy referendum on May's Deal versus Labour's unicorn renegotiation strategy. If, however, the Tory Hard Remainers followed their logic and did a deal with the Opposition (whether to form some kind of unity Government, or to put Corbyn into office) then the resultant administration would have no agenda other than resolving Brexit, and after its business was done there would, again, have to be a General Election - this time contested by a Conservative Party which would, by then, have ejected the Grieve-Soubry wing from its orbit, and would almost certainly be led by a Leaver. Again, that would function as a proxy referendum - this time, with the Tories advocating a new plan for a Hard Brexit and Labour the prevailing status quo at that time (Remain, or its own Withdrawal Agreement.)
The political situation is so volatile that it's impossible to predict who would do best in a General Election under either of those circumstances.
That is a very interesting post and goes some way to explaining the mystery that is the psyche of a Leaver. What is it that against the certainty that our society will deteriorate both socially and economically makes them want to leave? It's that it is a visceral fear and only visible to those who feel it.
It is called "Maintaining privilege" Roger. Those on top do not like competition and, given the display of "talent" from prominent Leavers, I would say that they have plenty to be worried about.
What remainers fail to understand is that "competition" in this case is just a race to the bottom. It is the old criticism of neo-liberal economics.
Unbridled competition depresses wages at the low end of the market and increases the gap between rich and poor. The rich with skills in high demand are highly mobile and can command a high salary wherever they go, while those without the requisite skills are left competing for low paid jobs, the worst houses, the bare minimum schools.
More importantly it is about opportunities - a middle class public schoolboy born in the South East will have access to far more opportunities than a working class kid born in Darlington and educated in the local comp.
Exposing our working class to untrammelled competition from the workers of much poorer countries in the form of freedom of movement may sound like a good idea from a macroeconomic perspective, but is a very poor idea from the perspective of those working class people who are left behind.
It is not about "maintaining privilege". Most of the people who voted to leave the EU would laugh in your smug, elitist face if you had the temerity to call them "privileged".
That is an argument but the post Bev was ultimately replying to was one from Casino Royal which said something altogether different. He seemed to be calling for the return of the old school tie and value system most of us hardly remember and if we do it's with some embarrassment
Nicola Sturgeon is getting herself into big trouble shielding unionist civil servants who tried to stitch up Alex Salmond. She seems to have lost the plot for feminism support. Why the two unionist turkeys have not been sacked is crazy. She may be job hunting if she does not watch.
Any sign of party rumblings of discontent at her?
Not openly for sure except for usual suspects like Sillars, but press etc bigging it up and Salmond will turn over every stone. Hard to see why she has supported these two chancers, given the women were pushed into getting ready to complain and then they changed the rules to fit the complaints before getting them to submit complaints. Bungling amateurs.
Morning Malc - where do you think all this controversy is going for Nicola Sturgeon and will she survive
Morning G, I have to say I have my doubts about her , too timid, too left wing and too feminist. I personally don't see her as being a patch on Alex S. Think Mike Russel or Angus Robertson would be much better. However I cannot see there ever being any evidence/charges against Salmond so will just be a case of whether she can stick it out whilst Police Scotland take a year or two to finish a 5 minute investigation. She certainly seems to be error prone in her judgment.
I think the SNP has a choice to a certain extent of whether it wants to be a revolutionary movement or the lightly nationalist establishment party of power. The Fianna Fáil of Scotland. Salmond seemed ambiguous; Sturgeon seems to favour the latter. Mrs Sturgeon has the advantage over any potential rivals of being the person Central Casting would come up with when tasked with finding the representative of Middle Scotland. It will take a lot to shift her.
Otoh this is yet another battle in the geopolitical war between light and dark. Apparently.
Hello! We'd like to sign a trade deal with you! What, we just violated the Vienna Convention when we denounced our agreement with the EU27 countries? Never mind that! We'd never do that to you! Hello? Hello?
Comments
Trump was very lucky, and his path to victory a very narrow one. I'd say he just had a strong instinct - combined with his own egoism - that there were a lot of Americans who thought like him, that he knew where to find them, and that the Democrats were largely ignoring or insulting them.
I despair. I really do.
Suck it up millennial pseudo-marxists. You've been well and truly had.
In respect of A50, I'd argue that's been discharged. We do have a look to the future trade agreement, and an agreement on what that should look like. And I'm happy with that.
No doubt there will be ups and downs in its negotiations, and give and take - that's politics - but I do believe we will end up with a good FTA and a fair deal.
I on the other hand am aware on where I've got things wrong, and have admitted so on here. Self-awareness isn't my problem.
Are you aware that anyone who follows your Twitter feed ends up wanting to kill themselves?
But that aside, how do you suppose that the EU is threatening our identity? It isn't as if our identity is some frail flower that needs a fence to protect it. Our language is used all over the world. Our universities are in the top league. We have a long and well documented history, and the likes of Shakespeare, Darwin and Newton command respect everywhere that people have got past subsistence farming.
For God's sake grow a pair. Britain's identity is perfectly safe as part of a union of European countries.
Good luck.
https://twitter.com/helenmarycymru?lang=en
The twitter feed is about transsexuals banned from public toilets, women of colour against the sex trade, rape trials in Worcestershire, domestic violence in Preston, missing teddies, lost dogs in Northampton, re-tweets of job adverts for third sector organisations.
I can find hardly anything about Wales (apart from an occasional retweet).
The twitter feed looks like she is much, much more interested in gender politics than Welsh politics.
The world that she inhabits is just so remote from the forgotten, desperate people in the grim, drug-addled Council estates in Llanelli that she represents.
No wonder Llanelli voted Leave.
Eventually of course something would have given but the result would have been far more messy and far nastier than we are seeing now.
This at least, Cameron understood. His mistake, from his perspective, was underestimating just how far down that road we had already travelled.
If you're still struggling, you should perhaps take a step back from your computer and ask yourself what the EU might have done or might be pursuing that led to so many of your compatriots feeling so strongly and differently than you, rather than stating your own point of view, and demanding they, repeatedly, explain it for you.
My Twitter has a lot of followers who remain very much alive!
It certainly wasn't dull, either before or after !!!!
It is called "Maintaining privilege" Roger. Those on top do not like competition and, given the display of "talent" from prominent Leavers, I would say that they have plenty to be worried about.
But did anyone in Europe actually seriously predict that Trump would win? I mean, did anyone sensible provide a well-argued, evidence-based case that Trump could win. (I know a few right-wing shouty crackers said Trump could win).
I am not criticising JackW. I also didn't expect in a million years that Trump would win.
I unfollowed you because you are the most depressing and negative person on the internet. I can only assume others either reflexively agree with you, have hidden you out of politeness, or are otherwise dormant accounts.
Even Eeyore would want to escape his pen if he lived near you.
In fact..
https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/668443593363865601
Hassan welched on the bet btw.
I went to pull out my eight foot horn on the full swell as usual.
But this time, the knob came off in my hand.
I didn't know where to put it...
But the Mirror writes it up as Corbyn refusing to rule out opposing Brexit in any GE.
Now there ain’t going to be a GE, so this is a theoretical on a theoretical, but I don’t see anything to suggest that Labour won’t support a People’s Vote.
There is no majority for a GE.
There is no majority for May’s Deal.
There is no majority for a permanent customs union (let’s call it “Corbyn’s deal”).
There is certainly no majority for No Deal.
There *may* be a majority for “Norway plus”, deal, but I doubt it.
There likely is a majority for one of the deals above, contingent on a People’s Vote.
So in my view, unless tin-ear Tessy wants to relinquish control completely, she needs to figure out how to concede a People’s Vote in a way that keeps the Tory Party together.
In a way, it is a final can-kick for her, and it keeps her Deal on the table.
I am delighted to have added well over 1,000 Twitter followers in the last year, including MPs, columnists on national newspapers and a number from Spain. I agree that most will not see the world in the way you do.
In many types of services (marketing, management consultancy etc) regulations are irrelevant. There is no way to stop a US company from commissioning a British one to draw up a marketing strategy. This is the case regardless of Brexit.
As for those that are governed by regulations, isn’t it remarkable that with the exception of financial services, the EU has done very little to promote a Single Market in services that is in any way as deep as the one for goods? A cynic might say it’s because those are the areas in which France and Germany do not have comparative advantage.
I consider regaining control over domestic financial regulation to be a fair exchange for passporting. The EU and ECB’s record during the financial crisis was dreadful, as set out in Adam Tooze’s superb history of it that has just been published.
Unbridled competition depresses wages at the low end of the market and increases the gap between rich and poor. The rich with skills in high demand are highly mobile and can command a high salary wherever they go, while those without the requisite skills are left competing for low paid jobs, the worst houses, the bare minimum schools.
More importantly it is about opportunities - a middle class public schoolboy born in the South East will have access to far more opportunities than a working class kid born in Darlington and educated in the local comp.
Exposing our working class to untrammelled competition from the workers of much poorer countries in the form of freedom of movement may sound like a good idea from a macroeconomic perspective, but is a very poor idea from the perspective of those working class people who are left behind.
It is not about "maintaining privilege". Most of the people who voted to leave the EU would laugh in your smug, elitist face if you had the temerity to call them "privileged".
It is clear if Corbyn came out for a referendum it would delight 75% of his membership but would lay waste to his leave seats as John Mann indicated, again this morning
Obviously there is an element of risk. MPs may come back from their constituencies tomorrow and suddenly decide to back her after all.
I'm so skint at the moment, that I can't take even this tiny risk. But otherwise...
The mistake he and I made was that the chance of systematic polling error across the rust belt states was not independent for each state but would be correlated - if one state was off they would all be off.
Thank you.
Rejoin will be what many of the membership will be pushing for I would have thought.
Then I realised it was six, not sex.
Let’s try another one. Let’s say I’m a YouTuber with a Patreon account which US and Japanese citizens pay into. What aspect of our EU membership would impinge on this arrangement?
But I think you have a very restricted view of what services are. Try this:
https://institute.global/insight/renewing-centre/brexit-and-uks-services-trade
Besides, Leave get accused of wanting to take us back to the 1950s. Do you really want to take us back to the 1750s?
Apropos of the chances of the youth from the Darlington comp,
Sadly, 'twas ever thus, and I suspect will not change as a result of Brexit. In fact the position may well be worsened.
Which might be never frankly!
What trade deals can be made while in the backstop without creating a customs border in the Irish Sea.
Those benefits you claim are negated by the backstop which is why it is so toxic.
If Brexit is derailed the next election will be interesting with some unusual results I think.
But given May's previous form on pulling the MV at the last minute, then I think I would prefer to be a layer rather than betting on such skinny odds.
General Elections have a life of their own. If people want to talk about something else they can do so.
But I am curious as to what PB Tories think their Brexit manifesto position would be if it came to a GE taking place in the next month or so. Would they try and ditch May, if she decides to cling on? If they stick with May, would there manifesto be a reflection of her current position, putting us all back to square one if they do win a very small majority or form another minority government? What are the alternatives?
Editted to hopefully make more sense!!
1. Cancellation of Brexit, or a Norwegian settlement, is only likely to occur in circumstances that lead to a General Election later in the year
2. Whilst not absolutely certain, it seems very likely that Theresa May would finally resign as Tory leader if she were deposed by Parliament as Prime Minister, which is what cancellation implies
3. The Conservative Party will then be captured by Brexit: I don't suggest that the next leader will come from the ERG, but they will need the backing of the party membership which is strongly in favour of the concept and will be furious at having been thwarted to boot
4. Therefore, the Tories will go into a General Election as the party of Leave, versus Labour as the party of Remain, with highly unpredictable consequences. And, unlike in a referendum, it takes a lot less than 50%+1 of the vote to win a General Election outright
The pro-EU majority in Parliament might be able to forge a new settlement on Europe that is to their liking - but making it stick might not be so smart and easy.
https://twitter.com/naebD/status/1084385607487549440
If there's a referendum and Remain wins then she can rule until 2027.
IIRC a study estimated the UK would lose about half its services exports to the EU.
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/tradekb/Knowledgebase/50665/Modes-of-Supply
I just don't think it is the twitter feed of someone who is interested in Welsh nationalism, or Llanelli, or Caerfyrddin, or even Wales really.
The twitter feed reads like the social work department of a international third-sector charity. She churns out a complete catalogue of vacuous jargon, divisive identitarian nit-picking and Pollyanna platitudes. On none of the issues does she have any particular profound or personal insight.
Llanelli is a desperately poor place -- why is she not concerned about drugs on the Pen Y Fan Council Estate? Or the emerging scandal of the Wellness Village in Burry Port ? Would you not expect her to have some insight into these questions? Apparently not.
Not uncoincidentally, Plaid Cymru has gone backwards at any alarming pace in Llanelli (a seat they once held in the Welsh Assembly).
Compared to those coming here, people at any level in Britain are privileged, and let us face it, it was immigration - those nasty forriners (particularly the whole of Turkey) - that swung it for Leave. Even the Leave coordinators admitted that they used immigration as a frightener.
Given that the Deal essentially represents nearly all of May's work as Prime Minister, I don't see how she benefits from allowing that to proceed. Consequently, she has no incentive to cooperate. Why voluntarily reduce yourself to the status of a puppet and a human shield for other people's alternative solutions which you profoundly disagree with and do not want?
Therefore, if the reports in the Sunday Times are anything like accurate, and the Tory Hard Remainer faction intends to seize control of the Parliamentary machinery with the co-operation of Bercow and leading Opposition figures, then May could have nothing left to lose by resigning as Prime Minister.
If the Tory party were then to stick together as a unit on confidence then, given the position of the DUP, an alternative Government could not be formed and a General Election would follow, which would most likely function as a proxy referendum on May's Deal versus Labour's unicorn renegotiation strategy. If, however, the Tory Hard Remainers followed their logic and did a deal with the Opposition (whether to form some kind of unity Government, or to put Corbyn into office) then the resultant administration would have no agenda other than resolving Brexit, and after its business was done there would, again, have to be a General Election - this time contested by a Conservative Party which would, by then, have ejected the Grieve-Soubry wing from its orbit, and would almost certainly be led by a Leaver. Again, that would function as a proxy referendum - this time, with the Tories advocating a new plan for a Hard Brexit and Labour the prevailing status quo at that time (Remain, or its own Withdrawal Agreement.)
The political situation is so volatile that it's impossible to predict who would do best in a General Election under either of those circumstances.
I’d say Holyrood is closer to Westminster or Rome than Washington
Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras has said he will call a confidence vote after his governing coalition split over the Macedonia name change.
Defence Minister Panos Kammenos withdrew his party's support, signalling his opposition ahead of an expected vote in the Greek parliament.
The two countries recently agreed that Greece's northern neighbour would be called North Macedonia, therefore ending a 27-year-long row.
Macedonia has ratified the deal.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46855088
Seems such a shame for Macedonia if the Greeks don't hold up their end over all this.