Worst of both worlds. No consensus on Brexit has formed but the shift against Brexit is nowhere near big enough to stop it. The biggest policy decision the country has taken in 50 + years is a zombie.
And how is Madrid in any sense livable for 3 months of the summer with 40deg highs?
Rekjyavik must be none too great for 3 months of the winter come to that.
No York. No Harrogate. No Winchester. No Bath. Yes Manchester. So obvs bollocks.
Almost noone British has heard of - still less visited - Plovdiv in Bulgaria, but it's superb.
You can visit there today, now, and be one of handful of British tourists in the whole city and fully experience it as a local would, with yourself being something of a curiosity.
There are some seriously boring places high on that list. Frankfurt, Munich, Zurich. Good grief.
Like all lists it's just something to argue about, but for pleasant living Zurich is very high on my list, and I know someone who liked living in Frankfurt. The same person is now in Vienna and loves it to bits, though.
It was an interesting list, but I thought it made some very strange assumptions. Hamburg is Germany's second city? Really? Won't Frankfurt and Bonn both have views on that? And who actually thinks Lyon is more significant than Marseilles, or a close rival to Paris?
I'm not sure either Istanbul or Naples are great to live in, but they are my favourite big European cities.
FWIW I think they claim to be measuring liveability, but the commentaries are very touristy - it's great to have some nice buildings, but if you live there, how often do you look at them? Do Londoners regularly visit Westminster Abbey, say?
Yes, if you're judging by quality of administration, Naples won't rank highly. If you're judging by excellent food and consumer goods, fascinating buildings and art, beautiful location and views, it would do.
Prague, Warsaw, Vienna and Ljubljana would be my choices. Budapest isn't bad either. Lyon is ok. I wouldn't touch Paris, Brussels, Frankfurt or Marseilles.
There seems a remarkable consensus that Germanic cities are boring. But Munich at a stretch.
Whilst I love visiting Switzerland I'm not sure I could live there. You could kill yourself on a Sunday in Geneva.
Worst of both worlds. No consensus on Brexit has formed but the shift against Brexit is nowhere near big enough to stop it. The biggest policy decision the country has taken in 50 + years is a zombie.
It is indeed
Then the only option is to test the "No Deal" hypothesis. If it's chaos and disaster, the people will blame the politicians and the Government for letting it happen and if No Deal leads to a whole lot of nothing, the people will blame the politicians and the Government for making them think chaos and disaster were about to ensue.
Sometimes democracy needs to be learnt the hard way - it's not Strictly or X Factor, this is real life and it matters.
And how is Madrid in any sense livable for 3 months of the summer with 40deg highs?
Rekjyavik must be none too great for 3 months of the winter come to that.
Edinburgh property prices are a bit totally bonkers to be honest.
They were when we brought our first flat in 1964 in Comely Bank.
Edinburgh is a fabulous city and we enjoyed our time living there in the 1960's
If you could afford to buy your first flat in Comely Bank then clearly property prices then were nowhere near as bonkers as now, or you were suddenly very wealthy.
On Brexit, I think voters would be open minded on any Brexit solution provided it addressed migration (forget "explaining the benefits") saved some contributions and obviously removed the UK from the core political project.
There should be all sorts of creative tunes that Westminster and Brussels could play there on both the single market and customs union - not that I'd agree with many of them - but everyone has their red lines and agendas.
There are some seriously boring places high on that list. Frankfurt, Munich, Zurich. Good grief.
Like all lists it's just something to argue about, but for pleasant living Zurich is very high on my list, and I know someone who liked living in Frankfurt. The same person is now in Vienna and loves it to bits, though.
It was an interesting list, but I thought it made some very strange assumptions. Hamburg is Germany's second city? Really? Won't Frankfurt and Bonn both have views on that? And who actually thinks Lyon is more significant than Marseilles, or a close rival to Paris?
I'm not sure either Istanbul or Naples are great to live in, but they are my favourite big European cities.
FWIW I think they claim to be measuring liveability, but the commentaries are very touristy - it's great to have some nice buildings, but if you live there, how often do you look at them? Do Londoners regularly visit Westminster Abbey, say?
Yes, if you're judging by quality of administration, Naples won't rank highly. If you're judging by excellent food and consumer goods, fascinating buildings and art, beautiful location and views, it would do.
Prague, Warsaw, Vienna and Ljubljana would be my choices. Budapest isn't bad either. Lyon is ok. I wouldn't touch Paris, Brussels, Frankfurt or Marseilles.
There seems a remarkable consensus that Germanic cities are boring. But Munich at a stretch.
Whilst I love visiting Switzerland I'm not sure I could live there. You could kill yourself on a Sunday in Geneva.
The basic problem is that voters have instructed the politicians to leave the European Union and the politicians haven't found an acceptable way to do so. Unacceptable because those ways reduce trade and wealth and they remove the UK from the table where it negotiates its interests.
So do you go back to voters and say, do you want to go ahead anyway? Or do you go ahead anyway and to hell with the consequences because voters aren't aware of the issues anyway?
Sadly for the referendum supporters Caroline Flint's article in the Guardian sinks any hope it would pass the HOC. Seems there as many labour mps against as for and add in the majority of conservatives and DUP it is clear that when Chuka Umunna said last week they do not have the numbers he was speaking with his knowlege of how it is dividing his party in two
I have never been a huge fan of a second referendum. The question doesn't get more sensible for being asked twice. Nevertheless, I think there's a case to be made for May's Deal to be laid before the country and asked, this is the best we can do. Do you want to go ahead anyway?
I was surprised when JRM said in today's mail that if Brexit is threatened he will vote for TM deal rather than lose it
I still believe it is a good deal, especially for NI, but the brexiteers got gready and of course the remainers would attack any deal
I am not surprised the public do not rate it as all they hear from both sides it is rubbish and they go along with that view. No one can convince me more than 5% of the public have any idea about the subject, other than walking away, keeping our 39 billion, and giving the EU a bloody nose sounds good, sadly
Worst of both worlds. No consensus on Brexit has formed but the shift against Brexit is nowhere near big enough to stop it. The biggest policy decision the country has taken in 50 + years is a zombie.
It is indeed
It's because both sides are pursuing absolute victory, and believe they can win it.
They are wrong. This country has been conflicted about Europe and ambivalent about some parts and enthusiastic about others for decades, if not centuries.
On Brexit, I think voters would be open minded on any Brexit solution provided it addressed migration (forget "explaining the benefits") saved some contributions and obviously removed the UK from the core political project.
There should be all sorts of creative tunes that Westminster and Brussels could play there on both the single market and customs union - not that I'd agree with many of them - but everyone has their red lines and agendas.
Perhaps a solution to address migration would be to join the Euro to reduce asymmetric labour market impacts?
The basic problem is that voters have instructed the politicians to leave the European Union and the politicians haven't found an acceptable way to do so. Unacceptable because those ways reduce trade and wealth and they remove the UK from the table where it negotiates its interests.
So do you go back to voters and say, do you want to go ahead anyway? Or do you go ahead anyway and to hell with the consequences because voters aren't aware of the issues anyway?
Sadly for the referendum supporters Caroline Flint's article in the Guardian sinks any hope it would pass the HOC. Seems there as many labour mps against as for and add in the majority of conservatives and DUP it is clear that when Chuka Umunna said last week they do not have the numbers he was speaking with his knowlege of how it is dividing his party in two
Flint has been firmly in the Brexit camp since the referendum so her article doesn’t have much significance in judging the views of the wider Labour Party.
I can understand your disappointment but Lisa Nandy has said the same and it is clear front bench labour mps will resign if it is adopted. It does not have the numbers
On Brexit, I think voters would be open minded on any Brexit solution provided it addressed migration (forget "explaining the benefits") saved some contributions and obviously removed the UK from the core political project.
There should be all sorts of creative tunes that Westminster and Brussels could play there on both the single market and customs union - not that I'd agree with many of them - but everyone has their red lines and agendas.
Perhaps a solution to address migration would be to join the Euro to reduce asymmetric labour market impacts?
Another would be to lay waste to the British economy and our core political and social freedoms so noone wanted to come here. And just as silly.
You'd argue that European federalism was the answer to the everlasting fountain of youth, if you could.
The basic problem is that voters have instructed the politicians to leave the European Union and the politicians haven't found an acceptable way to do so. Unacceptable because those ways reduce trade and wealth and they remove the UK from the table where it negotiates its interests.
So do you go back to voters and say, do you want to go ahead anyway? Or do you go ahead anyway and to hell with the consequences because voters aren't aware of the issues anyway?
Sadly for the referendum supporters Caroline Flint's article in the Guardian sinks any hope it would pass the HOC. Seems there as many labour mps against as for and add in the majority of conservatives and DUP it is clear that when Chuka Umunna said last week they do not have the numbers he was speaking with his knowlege of how it is dividing his party in two
You keep saying this Big G, it seems to give you some kind of satisfaction.
The truth is, indicative voting may demonstrate it the “least unfavourite” route out of this mess.
We can’t rule it out yet. I concede that it doesn’t seem to have the “big mo”, but neither does anything else. Customs Union seems still born, and Norway seems to be fizzling out as well.
With respect I cannot keep on saying something when it was only published in todays guardian.
It does look as if it will not get the numbers in the HOC
Also I do listen to a wide range of views and actually think the Guardian is a professional paper, even though I may disagree with it's views on occasions. I am not just a daily mail reader !!!!
I think Corbyn has made an error of Judgement not sitting down with May. He could have had a very short meeting, and said she was not serious. He provided the opportunity for his opponents to bring his past behaviour and apply it to the current situation
I was surprised when JRM said in today's mail that if Brexit is threatened he will vote for TM deal rather than lose it
I am not surprised the public do not rate it as all they hear from both sides it is rubbish and they go along with that view. No one can convince me more than 5% of the public have any idea about the subject, other than walking away, keeping our 39 billion, and giving the EU a bloody nose sounds good, sadly
The WA is an impenetrable piece of legalese which has been open to interpretation, misinterpretation and subjective analysis. It doesn't matter any more if it's a good deal or a bad deal, it's a dead deal.
Of course, JRM would say he would support it if the alternative was say the revocation of A50 but that's not happening either so clinging to his words as some form of tacit support for May's Deal is absurd.
With neither revocation nor a second referendum on offer and no prospect of a Government of National Unity (Prime Minister Cable anyone?), we're left with going to the EU and pleading for an extension (to what end I don't know) or heading out on 29/3 without an agreement which is clearly growing in support as no one "important" has warned us we will all be eating dirt within a week.
The question now is whether May will continue to cling to her Deal and seek a further A450 extension in the hope the proximity of No Deal and another dollop of Project Fear will bolster support or accepting the Deal is dead and making proper active and sensible preparations for leaving the EU on the evening of March 29th.
Interesting as Sean F was expecting a big swing from the centre parties in view of their allowing the social democrats to form a minority government again. The voters -asked immediately afterwards - say meh, we're voting like we did before.
No deal at 38%? Higher than I thought it would be.
No Deal has a high floor. I think Leave support has solidified behind it.
The sort of Leavers who favour a pragmatic compromise are probably only 1:5 and heavily overpresented on forums like pb.com.
By definition, Leave is not pragmatic, compromising, or at all rational.
That's certainly not true. It has a different mixture of advantages and disadvantages and EU membership is no different to anything else in life that isn't black and white.
The process for any alternative has to recognise those trade offs, though, and - in a complex world - put in place reasonable arrangements to transition from one to another.
I think Corbyn has made an error of Judgement not sitting down with May. He could have had a very short meeting, and said she was not serious. He provided the opportunity for his opponents to bring his past behaviour and apply it to the current situation
Maybe so. It rather depends on whether anything of substance emerges from the talks with other party leaders. Entirely possible that he ends up being vindicated. Tonight's two polls do not indicate much shift in voting intentions.
And how is Madrid in any sense livable for 3 months of the summer with 40deg highs?
Rekjyavik must be none too great for 3 months of the winter come to that.
Edinburgh property prices are a bit totally bonkers to be honest.
They were when we brought our first flat in 1964 in Comely Bank.
Edinburgh is a fabulous city and we enjoyed our time living there in the 1960's
If you could afford to buy your first flat in Comely Bank then clearly property prices then were nowhere near as bonkers as now, or you were suddenly very wealthy.
£1,500 lent to us by my father in law for a one bed second floor flat with no lifts and cold in the winter
I was surprised when JRM said in today's mail that if Brexit is threatened he will vote for TM deal rather than lose it
I am not surprised the public do not rate it as all they hear from both sides it is rubbish and they go along with that view. No one can convince me more than 5% of the public have any idea about the subject, other than walking away, keeping our 39 billion, and giving the EU a bloody nose sounds good, sadly
The WA is an impenetrable piece of legalese which has been open to interpretation, misinterpretation and subjective analysis. It doesn't matter any more if it's a good deal or a bad deal, it's a dead deal.
Hard to argue that. And JRM's comments are pointless; Brexit was already potentially threatened, and he didn't vote for it then.
I think Corbyn has made an error of Judgement not sitting down with May. He could have had a very short meeting, and said she was not serious. He provided the opportunity for his opponents to bring his past behaviour and apply it to the current situation
Peter Oborne's article in the mail this morning is a perfect analysis of Corbyn missing a fabulous opportunity for labour. If you can souce the article is a good read and should be for all labour politicians and members if the party ever wants to get into government.
The basic problem is that voters have instructed the politicians to leave the European Union and the politicians haven't found an acceptable way to do so. Unacceptable because those ways reduce trade and wealth and they remove the UK from the table where it negotiates its interests.
So do you go back to voters and say, do you want to go ahead anyway? Or do you go ahead anyway and to hell with the consequences because voters aren't aware of the issues anyway?
Sadly for the referendum supporters Caroline Flint's article in the Guardian sinks any hope it would pass the HOC. Seems there as many labour mps against as for and add in the majority of conservatives and DUP it is clear that when Chuka Umunna said last week they do not have the numbers he was speaking with his knowlege of how it is dividing his party in two
I have never been a huge fan of a second referendum. The question doesn't get more sensible for being asked twice. Nevertheless, I think there's a case to be made for May's Deal to be laid before the country and asked, this is the best we can do. Do you want to go ahead anyway?
I was surprised when JRM said in today's mail that if Brexit is threatened he will vote for TM deal rather than lose it
I still believe it is a good deal, especially for NI, but the brexiteers got gready and of course the remainers would attack any deal
I am not surprised the public do not rate it as all they hear from both sides it is rubbish and they go along with that view. No one can convince me more than 5% of the public have any idea about the subject, other than walking away, keeping our 39 billion, and giving the EU a bloody nose sounds good, sadly
Sums up the ' late decadence ' of Brexit. Vote for huge and complex change then get bored of it when it turns out to be huge and complex.
lol, yes. Mind you, the question is ambiguous - if you're against leaving, how do you answer? A neutral formulation would be "don't care if we do it or not, just want it decided".
Considering all the fun and games of the last 18 months, and all the heat and argument, it really is quite something how little polling movement has happened.
No deal at 38%? Higher than I thought it would be.
No Deal has a high floor. I think Leave support has solidified behind it.
The sort of Leavers who favour a pragmatic compromise are probably only 1:5 and heavily overpresented on forums like pb.com.
By definition, Leave is not pragmatic, compromising, or at all rational.
That's certainly not true. It has a different mixture of advantages and disadvantages and EU membership is no different to anything else in life that isn't black and white.
The process for any alternative has to recognise those trade offs, though, and - in a complex world - put in place reasonable arrangements to transition from one to another.
Leave (as opposed to the concept leaving) has made no efforts at all to concede there are any trade offs, and has sought to block any reasonable transition arrangements.
Johnson, Davis et al have revealed themselves to be truly hollow men.
I was surprised when JRM said in today's mail that if Brexit is threatened he will vote for TM deal rather than lose it
I am not surprised the public do not rate it as all they hear from both sides it is rubbish and they go along with that view. No one can convince me more than 5% of the public have any idea about the subject, other than walking away, keeping our 39 billion, and giving the EU a bloody nose sounds good, sadly
The WA is an impenetrable piece of legalese which has been open to interpretation, misinterpretation and subjective analysis. It doesn't matter any more if it's a good deal or a bad deal, it's a dead deal.
Of course, JRM would say he would support it if the alternative was say the revocation of A50 but that's not happening either so clinging to his words as some form of tacit support for May's Deal is absurd.
With neither revocation nor a second referendum on offer and no prospect of a Government of National Unity (Prime Minister Cable anyone?), we're left with going to the EU and pleading for an extension (to what end I don't know) or heading out on 29/3 without an agreement which is clearly growing in support as no one "important" has warned us we will all be eating dirt within a week.
The question now is whether May will continue to cling to her Deal and seek a further A450 extension in the hope the proximity of No Deal and another dollop of Project Fear will bolster support or accepting the Deal is dead and making proper active and sensible preparations for leaving the EU on the evening of March 29th.
Of all the polling that has surprised me is the support for no deal
It is a very real prospect and TM will not take it off the table.
Maybe Varadkar is getting very worried - indeed he should as it would devastate his Country, along with ours and others and cause the biggest crisis the EU has ever faced
I was surprised when JRM said in today's mail that if Brexit is threatened he will vote for TM deal rather than lose it
I am not surprised the public do not rate it as all they hear from both sides it is rubbish and they go along with that view. No one can convince me more than 5% of the public have any idea about the subject, other than walking away, keeping our 39 billion, and giving the EU a bloody nose sounds good, sadly
The WA is an impenetrable piece of legalese which has been open to interpretation, misinterpretation and subjective analysis. It doesn't matter any more if it's a good deal or a bad deal, it's a dead deal.
Of course, JRM would say he would support it if the alternative was say the revocation of A50 but that's not happening either so clinging to his words as some form of tacit support for May's Deal is absurd.
With neither revocation nor a second referendum on offer and no prospect of a Government of National Unity (Prime Minister Cable anyone?), we're left with going to the EU and pleading for an extension (to what end I don't know) or heading out on 29/3 without an agreement which is clearly growing in support as no one "important" has warned us we will all be eating dirt within a week.
The question now is whether May will continue to cling to her Deal and seek a further A450 extension in the hope the proximity of No Deal and another dollop of Project Fear will bolster support or accepting the Deal is dead and making proper active and sensible preparations for leaving the EU on the evening of March 29th.
Maybe Varadkar is getting very worried - indeed he should as it would devastate his Country, along with ours and others and cause the biggest crisis the EU has ever faced
Maybe he is worried, but for him the ram has touched the wall, as devastating as it might be for him he cannot politically roll back on it now.
And how is Madrid in any sense livable for 3 months of the summer with 40deg highs?
Rekjyavik must be none too great for 3 months of the winter come to that.
Edinburgh property prices are a bit totally bonkers to be honest.
They were when we brought our first flat in 1964 in Comely Bank.
Edinburgh is a fabulous city and we enjoyed our time living there in the 1960's
It is but it's grim in Winter.
It can be very beautiful in winter
I've lived in Scotland over the Winter.
It's grim. That's different from occasionally opening a window and seeing a beautiful view.
I lived in Berwick on Tweed and Edinburgh from 9 to 20 and believe you me it can be the coldest of all places but beautiful as well. But of course we all have different perceptions of beauty
Considering all the fun and games of the last 18 months, and all the heat and argument, it really is quite something how little polling movement has happened.
All joking about Cable aside, and for all the polarising effect of the two awful main party leaders pushing people to the other lot, the LD situation, even just up to 10, is still very surprising to me.
Of all the polling that has surprised me is the support for no deal
It is a very real prospect and TM will not take it off the table.
Maybe Varadkar is getting very worried - indeed he should as it would devastate his Country, along with ours and others and cause the biggest crisis the EU has ever faced
Throwing words around like "devastate" and "biggest crisis" is right out of the May "Project Fear" playbook. Even now, the supporters of May and her Deal are using banal and blatant scare tactics to frighten people into backing them.
Yes, we don't KNOW what leaving without a Deal will mean but to assume it will mean chaos and disaster is unwise.
I have frequently castigated this Government for inadequately planning for and mitigating the risks of leaving without a Deal. It was far from inconceivable and adequate time and resources could and should have been provided. There need not be a scintilla of panic or concern - contingencies should have been planned for and prepared and proper advice communicated to all parties and the population.
It's entirely valid to ask why this seems not to have happened and to ask who should be held accountable for these basic administrative failings.
Of all the polling that has surprised me is the support for no deal
It is a very real prospect and TM will not take it off the table.
Maybe Varadkar is getting very worried - indeed he should as it would devastate his Country, along with ours and others and cause the biggest crisis the EU has ever faced
Yes, we don't KNOW what leaving without a Deal will mean but to assume it will mean chaos and disaster is unwise.
Most people will lack the time or knowledge to completely assess the full extent of any impact. You don't think it will be anywhere near as bad as both government and opposition say it will be, fine, we can all hope you are correct, but for that vast majority who do not understand these things how does one make a judgement on it when so many say it will be a disaster? Just blindly believing the worst stories is, I am sure, unwise, but blindly following others who insist it will be fine seems equally unwise.
Of all the polling that has surprised me is the support for no deal
It is a very real prospect and TM will not take it off the table.
Maybe Varadkar is getting very worried - indeed he should as it would devastate his Country, along with ours and others and cause the biggest crisis the EU has ever faced
Throwing words around like "devastate" and "biggest crisis" is right out of the May "Project Fear" playbook. Even now, the supporters of May and her Deal are using banal and blatant scare tactics to frighten people into backing them.
Yes, we don't KNOW what leaving without a Deal will mean but to assume it will mean chaos and disaster is unwise.
I have frequently castigated this Government for inadequately planning for and mitigating the risks of leaving without a Deal. It was far from inconceivable and adequate time and resources could and should have been provided. There need not be a scintilla of panic or concern - contingencies should have been planned for and prepared and proper advice communicated to all parties and the population.
It's entirely valid to ask why this seems not to have happened and to ask who should be held accountable for these basic administrative failings.
So it will not devastate the Irish economy or create the EU biggest crisis if we walk away
I see Frank Field is proposing a series of indicative votes, an idea which I like.
del.
del.
del.
del.
del.
del.
I think a secret ballot should be on the agenda too. No one seemed keen when I said so a week or so ago, but surely desperate times call for desperate measures. I'd then foresee:
1) >450 votes for remaining in the EU vs. 200 for leaving if the ballots are marked by pencil on plain paper or 2) ~400 vs. 250 if they're stamped and in theory identifiable by the Gestapo - so sorry, Tory Central Office - if they decide to hunt down 'traitors'.
To be honest I cannot think of anything more dishonest
On a vote of such national importance every mp must be identified on the choice they make to be accountable to voters and their constituents
Trust in politicians is at an all time low and this would put the cap on it
It cannot be allowed in a democracy
In principle I'm with you. But there is a hell of a lot of healing needed in our politics and nation. And not allowing the blaming of individuals for what's happened may be an important step of that.
In our council group - I know the scale doesn't compare - we've done this twice in 8 years on really contentious issues and we found it helped us move on, on both occasions.
MPs have to be made of stern enough stuff to be accountable for their actions. Whatever the outcome they would all be hounded to reveal which way they had voted, and the public would not be able to move on from that. Being an MP is not meant to be easy, a private vote because they might face some rancour is a preposterous idea.
So's Brexit, especially the ridiculous point that many people voted against the EU because they disliked the effects on their lives of the policies of Whitehall.
I didn't create the problem, I'm just keen to resolve it. Maybe UK PLC should offer a prize fund of £10M to anyone who can ...
Several MPs including Jesse Norman have refused to disclose how they voted in 2016. Agreed, it's not exactly the same, but MPs can sometimes take part in a secret ballot and manage to keep it secret.
A parliament wide secret-ballot could just be part of a healing process, although it would need a lot of other things too.
Most people will lack the time or knowledge to completely assess the full extent of any impact. You don't think it will be anywhere near as bad as both government and opposition say it will be, fine, we can all hope you are correct, but for that vast majority who do not understand these things how does one make a judgement on it when so many say it will be a disaster? Just blindly believing the worst stories is, I am sure, unwise, but blindly following others who insist it will be fine seems equally unwise.
We touched on this before and as I had other things to do I couldn't properly respond to you.
This is about fear as a political weapon and tool. If you make people scared enough they will agree to anything and follow anyone. Supporters of the WA basically only have Fear left now - it didn't work on the MPs so they are hoping it will work on the population who will force the MPs to reconsider and ultimately accept the Deal.
Oddly enough, the same game is played with Corbyn as it was with Blair before him - make people (especially the elderly) believe a change in Government will mean their grandchildren will be sold into indentured servitude and they'll support the current Government whatever their reservations.
Unfortunately, fear works and going negative is the political manifestation. We saw this in the 2016 Referendum and we'll see it again in any subsequent vote.
Of all the polling that has surprised me is the support for no deal
It is a very real prospect and TM will not take it off the table.
Maybe Varadkar is getting very worried - indeed he should as it would devastate his Country, along with ours and others and cause the biggest crisis the EU has ever faced
Throwing words around like "devastate" and "biggest crisis" is right out of the May "Project Fear" playbook. Even now, the supporters of May and her Deal are using banal and blatant scare tactics to frighten people into backing them.
Yes, we don't KNOW what leaving without a Deal will mean but to assume it will mean chaos and disaster is unwise.
I have frequently castigated this Government for inadequately planning for and mitigating the risks of leaving without a Deal. It was far from inconceivable and adequate time and resources could and should have been provided. There need not be a scintilla of panic or concern - contingencies should have been planned for and prepared and proper advice communicated to all parties and the population.
It's entirely valid to ask why this seems not to have happened and to ask who should be held accountable for these basic administrative failings.
So it will not devastate the Irish economy or create the EU biggest crisis if we walk away
May as well do it then !!!!!
The one thing 'no deal' is most likely to do is devastate the Irish economy. It'll probably have little impact elsewhere, but we'll all certainly see effects.
So's Brexit, especially the ridiculous point that many people voted against the EU because they disliked the effects on their lives of the policies of Whitehall.
I didn't create the problem, I'm just keen to resolve it. Maybe UK PLC should offer a prize fund of £10M to anyone who can ...
Several MPs including Jesse Norman have refused to disclose how they voted in 2016. Agreed, it's not exactly the same, but MPs can sometimes take part in a secret ballot and manage to keep it secret.
A parliament wide secret-ballot could just be part of a healing process, although it would need a lot of other things too.
But that's the point, it won't heal anything because we have a right to know how people decided on the fate of this country in parliament, and there would be tremendous anger at taking that away. Holding MPs responsible for their decisions is absolutely core to the whole system. As you note it is not the same as their own personal electoral votes. This is how power over us is exercised, and because they find it a bit difficult we don't get to know? It is perfectly reasonable for someone to want to vote against their MP for making a decision they do not like, it is not healing to tell the public, no, your MP is a bit nervous about this so you just have to accept their power over you without knowing what they did with it.
Yes, we're all keen for the issue to be resolved, but some solutions create even bigger problems. Remaining without a referendum would be less problematic than denying us all the right to know how our representatives vote.
An MP unwilling to tell us how they voted in the referendum is fair enough. It'll annoy people, but it's how they act in parliament that matters more than how they exercise their own democratic rights. But what MP would be unwilling to tell us how they vote on bills? That's the job, standing up, making choices, and facing the public. It's rough sometimes, but there it is.
Most people will lack the time or knowledge to completely assess the full extent of any impact. You don't think it will be anywhere near as bad as both government and opposition say it will be, fine, we can all hope you are correct, but for that vast majority who do not understand these things how does one make a judgement on it when so many say it will be a disaster? Just blindly believing the worst stories is, I am sure, unwise, but blindly following others who insist it will be fine seems equally unwise.
We touched on this before and as I had other things to do I couldn't properly respond to you.
This is about fear as a political weapon and tool. If you make people scared enough they will agree to anything and follow anyone. Supporters of the WA basically only have Fear left now - it didn't work on the MPs so they are hoping it will work on the population who will force the MPs to reconsider and ultimately accept the Deal.
Oddly enough, the same game is played with Corbyn as it was with Blair before him - make people (especially the elderly) believe a change in Government will mean their grandchildren will be sold into indentured servitude and they'll support the current Government whatever their reservations.
Unfortunately, fear works and going negative is the political manifestation. We saw this in the 2016 Referendum and we'll see it again in any subsequent vote.
Yes it does work, better than we'd all hope, I'm sure, but I'm none the wiser how people are going to be able to judge the impacts of no deal in an objective manner even if they want to.
Probably something different to what their modern day fanboys think.
That could be seen as to be directed at me. I suggest you correct any such misapprehensions immediately, otherwise you'll be needing to practice your marksmanship, swordsmanship, or just plain luck quite urgently.
I realise that it was probably inadvertent and that you hadn't seen your life ending in quite so swift and unimportant sort of way, but I can only suggest that should you survive you're more careful in the future.
Comments
You can visit there today, now, and be one of handful of British tourists in the whole city and fully experience it as a local would, with yourself being something of a curiosity.
Sometimes democracy needs to be learnt the hard way - it's not Strictly or X Factor, this is real life and it matters.
There should be all sorts of creative tunes that Westminster and Brussels could play there on both the single market and customs union - not that I'd agree with many of them - but everyone has their red lines and agendas.
I still believe it is a good deal, especially for NI, but the brexiteers got gready and of course the remainers would attack any deal
I am not surprised the public do not rate it as all they hear from both sides it is rubbish and they go along with that view. No one can convince me more than 5% of the public have any idea about the subject, other than walking away, keeping our 39 billion, and giving the EU a bloody nose sounds good, sadly
LAB: 37% (-2)
LDEM: 10% (+2)
UKIP: 6% (-1)
GRN: 3% (-)
via @ComRes, 16 - 17 Jan
Neck and neck methinks!
They are wrong. This country has been conflicted about Europe and ambivalent about some parts and enthusiastic about others for decades, if not centuries.
The sort of Leavers who favour a pragmatic compromise are probably only 1:5 and heavily overpresented on forums like pb.com.
You'd argue that European federalism was the answer to the everlasting fountain of youth, if you could.
It does look as if it will not get the numbers in the HOC
Also I do listen to a wide range of views and actually think the Guardian is a professional paper, even though I may disagree with it's views on occasions. I am not just a daily mail reader !!!!
And I add this and will duck immediately !!!!!!
'In deadlock the casting vote is usually for the status quo'
Of course, JRM would say he would support it if the alternative was say the revocation of A50 but that's not happening either so clinging to his words as some form of tacit support for May's Deal is absurd.
With neither revocation nor a second referendum on offer and no prospect of a Government of National Unity (Prime Minister Cable anyone?), we're left with going to the EU and pleading for an extension (to what end I don't know) or heading out on 29/3 without an agreement which is clearly growing in support as no one "important" has warned us we will all be eating dirt within a week.
The question now is whether May will continue to cling to her Deal and seek a further A450 extension in the hope the proximity of No Deal and another dollop of Project Fear will bolster support or accepting the Deal is dead and making proper active and sensible preparations for leaving the EU on the evening of March 29th.
Much the same in Britain, as far as I can see.
The process for any alternative has to recognise those trade offs, though, and - in a complex world - put in place reasonable arrangements to transition from one to another.
It's grim. That's different from occasionally opening a window and seeing a beautiful view.
Confirmed - Observer article has Labour 3% ahead.
@britainelects
22m22 minutes ago
More
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 40% (+1)
CON: 37% (-2)
LDEM: 7% (+1)
UKIP: 7% (+1)
via @OpiniumResearch, 16 - 18 Jan
Chgs. w/ Dec
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/1086717727232929793
Johnson, Davis et al have revealed themselves to be truly hollow men.
It is a very real prospect and TM will not take it off the table.
Maybe Varadkar is getting very worried - indeed he should as it would devastate his Country, along with ours and others and cause the biggest crisis the EU has ever faced
The Number Cruncher poll has the following Scottish Subsample.
Lab 28%
Con 27%
SNP 26%
LD 12%
I hope.
SNP looks a bit low there and LibDems too high.
Yes, we don't KNOW what leaving without a Deal will mean but to assume it will mean chaos and disaster is unwise.
I have frequently castigated this Government for inadequately planning for and mitigating the risks of leaving without a Deal. It was far from inconceivable and adequate time and resources could and should have been provided. There need not be a scintilla of panic or concern - contingencies should have been planned for and prepared and proper advice communicated to all parties and the population.
It's entirely valid to ask why this seems not to have happened and to ask who should be held accountable for these basic administrative failings.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/19/ministers-second-brexit-referendum-lib-dems
Con 43%
Lab 29%
Con 323 Lab 287 LD 16 SNP 2
May as well do it then !!!!!
Ah, subsamples - you're just waiting for someone to take them too seriously, aren't you?
Am awaiting the Opinium and ComRes tables to be published.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/02/21/fifty-shades-of-grey-voters-corbyns-punishing-polling-with-older-voters/
I didn't create the problem, I'm just keen to resolve it. Maybe UK PLC should offer a prize fund of £10M to anyone who can ...
Several MPs including Jesse Norman have refused to disclose how they voted in 2016. Agreed, it's not exactly the same, but MPs can sometimes take part in a secret ballot and manage to keep it secret.
A parliament wide secret-ballot could just be part of a healing process, although it would need a lot of other things too.
This is about fear as a political weapon and tool. If you make people scared enough they will agree to anything and follow anyone. Supporters of the WA basically only have Fear left now - it didn't work on the MPs so they are hoping it will work on the population who will force the MPs to reconsider and ultimately accept the Deal.
Oddly enough, the same game is played with Corbyn as it was with Blair before him - make people (especially the elderly) believe a change in Government will mean their grandchildren will be sold into indentured servitude and they'll support the current Government whatever their reservations.
Unfortunately, fear works and going negative is the political manifestation. We saw this in the 2016 Referendum and we'll see it again in any subsequent vote.
Yes, we're all keen for the issue to be resolved, but some solutions create even bigger problems. Remaining without a referendum would be less problematic than denying us all the right to know how our representatives vote.
An MP unwilling to tell us how they voted in the referendum is fair enough. It'll annoy people, but it's how they act in parliament that matters more than how they exercise their own democratic rights. But what MP would be unwilling to tell us how they vote on bills? That's the job, standing up, making choices, and facing the public. It's rough sometimes, but there it is.
What would Thatcher do?
What would Churchill do?
Churchill - sit back and wait I guess. 'We will sit them out on the beaches'.
It is Attlee that is needed.
Does anyone like Chris Grayling ?
I realise that it was probably inadvertent and that you hadn't seen your life ending in quite so swift and unimportant sort of way, but I can only suggest that should you survive you're more careful in the future.