Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
Yes, it was 1992 and banging on about Europe, that gave the Tories their current target audience. With the brief exception of Cameron (the only Tory to win a majority since 1992), there has been no attempt to address the political and social issues of that demographic.
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
Yes, it was 1992 and banging on about Europe, that gave the Tories their current target audience. With the brief exception of Cameron (the only Tory to win a majority since 1992), there has been no attempt to address the political and social issues of that demographic.
The most staggering shift that appears already underway would be the loss to the Tories of what used to be their core vote amongst the educated middle classes, particularly those working in business. It is disguised by the overwhelming support amongst the fastest growing demographic of pensioners, and some new but probably transient support amongst leaver working classes. Relying increasingly on pensioners for their support isn't a healthy position for our politics.
Mr. Jezziah, will Westminster also seek to impose laws on devolved matters in Scotland and Wales? Just curious.
I fully support the right of women to have abortions, and think it's sad that women in Northern Ireland don't have that. However, laws must be enacted by the relevant political bodies. There's no point devolving power if you're just going to override it.
Of course, as you say, this is 'not a good look' politically, which I'm sure never crossed the minds of the parties pushing for the reformation (NB I'm sure it's not their only motivation).
On reformation: the EU will continue to change, but it'll just be ever more integration
TBH I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of devolution but that just might be my anti nationalist leanings. I am happy for a higher power to overrule in matters as important as this. I believe making abortion illegal just cuts off access to safe abortion for poorer women or less powerful if they have rich but unhelpful families/partners.
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
Yes, it was 1992 and banging on about Europe, that gave the Tories their current target audience. With the brief exception of Cameron (the only Tory to win a majority since 1992), there has been no attempt to address the political and social issues of that demographic.
One of the problems (among many others) of both our political parties is that there is no significant effort to govern on behalf of the whole country. Corbyn, when you look at him with a cold eye, is about giving more to his supporters and screwing the rest over to pay for it while roundly abusing and decrying the said rest, very similar to the style of Chavez. May is slightly better but not much - there's a ruthlessness to the UC system or education that could be described as tough love but equally often looks like or indeed is callousness, and she's certainly n stranger to divisive rhetoric. But then Blair was just as bad (his education policy was a horror) and Thatcher was worse.
It might be the result of our electoral system which gives huge power to relatively small numbers of voters (35% strategy, anyone?) but I think it's also to do with the highly adverserial nature of our politics.
And it probably doesn't help that our politicians are all selfish numpties.
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
1992 was 27 years ago. As for 1950.....
TBH I'm sure I've seen that the Tories actually do even better among 65+ women than they do men so I guess they are still winning with lots of those women voters just struggling with lots of those who have started voting since.
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
Yes, it was 1992 and banging on about Europe, that gave the Tories their current target audience. With the brief exception of Cameron (the only Tory to win a majority since 1992), there has been no attempt to address the political and social issues of that demographic.
The most staggering shift that appears already underway would be the loss to the Tories of what used to be their core vote amongst the educated middle classes, particularly those working in business. It is disguised by the overwhelming support amongst the fastest growing demographic of pensioners, and some new but probably transient support amongst leaver working classes. Relying increasingly on pensioners for their support isn't a healthy position for our politics.
It used to be different when their message was "F*** Socialism" rather than "F*** Business". Perhaps the real issues is that the Conservatives no longer exist.
1975 was in one way similar to now. The first attack line is politics is to attack your opponent by personal mockery or insult. They're all too thick to understand, they're all lefties, racists, or fools etc.
Even as a Europhile then, I felt embarrassed at the one-sided media. The few honest politicians who pointed out the potential faults had little air-time, and those who wanted to be even-handed were crowded out.
Europe’s quest for the quiet life goes much further. The EU and most of its states were born or reborn from the rubble of war and the traumas of totalitarianism. Britons forget how deeply that affects their instincts. History is dense, present, complicated and inescapable on the mainland in a way that it is not in Britain. Memories of flight, destruction and oppression – the 3am rap at the door, the rumble of military trucks on cobbles, the squelch of carts laden with possessions on muddy tracks – live on in continental families in a way that they do in comparatively few British ones.
The opposite of horror and cataclysm is the quiet life. Voltaire wrote his novel Candide in 1759 after the catastrophic Lisbon earthquake and amid the destruction of the Seven Years’ War. The book preaches neither Panglossian optimism nor head-in-hands gloom, and rather the stoical satisfaction of a peaceful plot of land providing for its owners’ needs under the maxim: “We must cultivate our garden.” In the shadow of horror and cataclysm, the modest goal of a happily cultivated garden is the height of decency and civilisation. More than grand rhetoric about continental unity or geopolitics or European culture, this is the real objective of the EU – and what holds it together. It is also the thing that Brits most struggle to understand.
You may well have been a smarty-pants at 11 when it came to politics (and I'm glad you went on to a more fulfilling career elsewhere) but at 25, I had more of only a passing interest in the subject, and I suspect I represented the majority.
There were discordant voices but they were generally mocked. We were all Europhiles then. I read the Daily Mirror, the BBC was also Europhile and Tony Benn was the original swivel-eyed loon.
I should have remembered the old quotation. "Put not your trust in Prrinces."
I highly recommend Saunders book to you. It may well bring back memories.
There were ample discussions at the time on issues of sovereignty and direction of travel, such as this prime time debate, incidentally much more civilised and intelligent than current debates:
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
1992 was 27 years ago. As for 1950.....
TBH I'm sure I've seen that the Tories actually do even better among 65+ women than they do men so I guess they are still winning with lots of those women voters just struggling with lots of those who have started voting since.
Leaving aside vote distribution and efficiency, according to polls the parties are more or less evenly matched and have been for some years. Any block of voters (such as women) might make the crucial difference
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
Yes, it was 1992 and banging on about Europe, that gave the Tories their current target audience. With the brief exception of Cameron (the only Tory to win a majority since 1992), there has been no attempt to address the political and social issues of that demographic.
One of the problems (among many others) of both our political parties is that there is no significant effort to govern on behalf of the whole country. Corbyn, when you look at him with a cold eye, is about giving more to his supporters and screwing the rest over to pay for it while roundly abusing and decrying the said rest, very similar to the style of Chavez. May is slightly better but not much - there's a ruthlessness to the UC system or education that could be described as tough love but equally often looks like or indeed is callousness, and she's certainly n stranger to divisive rhetoric. But then Blair was just as bad (his education policy was a horror) and Thatcher was worse.
It might be the result of our electoral system which gives huge power to relatively small numbers of voters (35% strategy, anyone?) but I think it's also to do with the highly adverserial nature of our politics.
And it probably doesn't help that our politicians are all selfish numpties.
Have a good morning.
The adversarial nature of our politics itself stems from the voting system, which is absolutely at the heart of the symptoms you describe. That the larger parties go entirely unrepresented in large swathes of the country means that they do not have the internal champions and vested interests for those demographics and geographies, leading to an "us and them" mentality.
I was 25 at the time so I had other things to do (I got married later that year). In my dotage, I'd probably enjoy an intellectual debate like that. Is that why I come here?
But most people would happily switch over to the soaps. Now if we'd had a 'common market' discussion in 'Coronation Street'?
The backstop represents an unusually favourable position for the UK, not one in which the EU would want us staying indefinitely, and its detail represents something of a negotiating success for the PM. It's her lack of strategy for landing the deal and her inability to involve and then sell to her colleagues (edit/ coupled with their intransigence, as Edmund says) that have led to the crisis, not any overreach by the EU. It is in all of our interests to make sure the settlement protects the fragile peace in Ireland and not consequential on some evil intent by our neighbours.
Therefore I don't buy Alastair's lead at all. Although the historical stuff about Turkey, about which I was broadly aware having read the Mandolin guy's other books, is interesting and little known.
The backstop is a great deal for NI. It gives most of the benefits of the EU to NI, including CU and SM alignment at no cost.
If our supposed target FTA destination is to have no hard border, that requires us to remain so closely in step on CU and SM, that one wonders what the point of Brexit is. If we want to deviate from this, then Irish Sea customs are perfectly viable once the DUP return to their usual obscurity rather than being coalition partners.
The back stop is very good news for Northern Ireland, is supported by the people of Northern Ireland and has no material effect on anyone who loves on the mainland. The simple solution to it is to leave a decision on its continued existence to the people of Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, though, they are not considered competent enough to make such calls by the English nationalists who run the Conservative party.
Mr. Jezziah, will Westminster also seek to impose laws on devolved matters in Scotland and Wales? Just curious.
I fully support the right of women to have abortions, and think it's sad that women in Northern Ireland don't have that. However, laws must be enacted by the relevant political bodies. There's no point devolving power if you're just going to override it.
Of course, as you say, this is 'not a good look' politically, which I'm sure never crossed the minds of the parties pushing for the reformation (NB I'm sure it's not their only motivation).
On reformation: the EU will continue to change, but it'll just be ever more integration
TBH I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of devolution but that just might be my anti nationalist leanings. I am happy for a higher power to overrule in matters as important as this. I believe making abortion illegal just cuts off access to safe abortion for poorer women or less powerful if they have rich but unhelpful families/partners.
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
Power devolved is power retained (& to quote a certain Labour peer, had the aim of killing nationalism stone dead). Which nation do you think is retaining power in the context of UK devolution?
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
Trolls on Twitter are nothing new, and not unique to the far Left.
We have had all this stuff going on for over a year, with nondiscernable effect on polling, so repulsive as it is, it doesn't shift votes.
To misquote M&S these are not left wing trolls they are Labour Party trolls. It is the same reason the phone hacking had more cut through when the accusations about Molly Dowlers phone were made.
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
TBH all the right wing hate and rhetoric culminating in MPs getting targeted doesn't seem to have much impact on the polling so I'm not sure why this would either.
Not sure as to what you are referencing there but two points - right wing trolls don’t tend to be Tory trolls, and as with phone hacking MPs and Celebrities kind of sign up to getting attention for their profession so they should expect some attention from newspapers or political opponents. Not sure how this one will play out.
Mr. Jezziah, I'm also not a fan of devolution, but so long as it exists then the appropriate spheres of authority should be adhered to.
The problem for Corbyn is that both Scotland and Wales have their own tax raising powers and it is suggested that TM is considering devolving the same powers to NI, including corporation tax
In those circumstances Corbyn could increase English corporation tax and the devolved powers could undercut English rates to attract English businesses to move base within the UK
It is no wonder Corbyn and labour do not want devolution
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
Not really their target audience.
Not true. From 1950 to 1992 the Tories overwhelmingly won among women.
Yes, it was 1992 and banging on about Europe, that gave the Tories their current target audience. With the brief exception of Cameron (the only Tory to win a majority since 1992), there has been no attempt to address the political and social issues of that demographic.
One of the problems (among many others) of both our political parties is that there is no significant effort to govern on behalf of the whole country. Corbyn, when you look at him with a cold eye, is about giving more to his supporters and screwing the rest over to pay for it while roundly abusing and decrying the said rest, very similar to the style of Chavez. May is slightly better but not much - there's a ruthlessness to the UC system or education that could be described as tough love but equally often looks like or indeed is callousness, and she's certainly n stranger to divisive rhetoric. But then Blair was just as bad (his education policy was a horror) and Thatcher was worse.
It might be the result of our electoral system which gives huge power to relatively small numbers of voters (35% strategy, anyone?) but I think it's also to do with the highly adverserial nature of our politics.
And it probably doesn't help that our politicians are all selfish numpties.
Have a good morning.
The adversarial nature of our politics itself stems from the voting system, which is absolutely at the heart of the symptoms you describe. That the larger parties go entirely unrepresented in large swathes of the country means that they do not have the internal champions and vested interests for those demographics and geographies, leading to an "us and them" mentality.
Totally agree. Our voting system is not fit for purpose - even less so now that it cannot produce majorities. The Tories should be at least two parties, as should Labour. If they were we probably would not be going into a No Deal Brexit in two months and three days. Imagine living in a country where every vote actually means something.
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
1975 was in one way similar to now. The first attack line is politics is to attack your opponent by personal mockery or insult. They're all too thick to understand, they're all lefties, racists, or fools etc.
Even as a Europhile then, I felt embarrassed at the one-sided media. The few honest politicians who pointed out the potential faults had little air-time, and those who wanted to be even-handed were crowded out.
A good point, that honest political discourse is now pretty much broken, replaced by identity politics, personal abuse and social media replacing tradional forms of discussion.
The more difficult question is what to do about it.
Mr. Jezziah, will Westminster also seek to impose laws on devolved matters in Scotland and Wales? Just curious.
I fully support the right of women to have abortions, and think it's sad that women in Northern Ireland don't have that. However, laws must be enacted by the relevant political bodies. There's no point devolving power if you're just going to override it.
Of course, as you say, this is 'not a good look' politically, which I'm sure never crossed the minds of the parties pushing for the reformation (NB I'm sure it's not their only motivation).
On reformation: the EU will continue to change, but it'll just be ever more integration
TBH I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of devolution but that just might be my anti nationalist leanings. I am happy for a higher power to overrule in matters as important as this. I believe making abortion illegal just cuts off access to safe abortion for poorer women or less powerful if they have rich but unhelpful families/partners.
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
Power devolved is power retained (& to quote a certain Labour peer, had the aim of killing nationalism stone dead). Which nation do you think is retaining power in the context of UK devolution?
I have no real interest in the constructs of England, Wales or Scotland as nations, except maybe for the sake of football. I am fine with decisions being taken at a lesser level than UK government where it proves useful we obviously have councils for example for a reason and if there are actual good administration reasons you can justify mid level governance I just don't believe one area as fundamentally different people from the other based on a small geographical difference. Although I would be happy to take that one country thing to a further level with the EU in the future which is probably more of a minority position.
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
You could argue that point both ways though, if a lot of jobs are being created despite the highly unstable political situation and uncertain Brexit outcome, then perhaps even in the event of no deal they will be required.
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
TBH all the right wing hate and rhetoric culminating in MPs getting targeted doesn't seem to have much impact on the polling so I'm not sure why this would either.
Not sure as to what you are referencing there but two points - right wing trolls don’t tend to be Tory trolls, and as with phone hacking MPs and Celebrities kind of sign up to getting attention for their profession so they should expect some attention from newspapers or political opponents. Not sure how this one will play out.
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Mr. Jezziah, will Westminster also seek to impose laws on devolved matters in Scotland and Wales? Just curious.
I fully support the right of women to have abortions, and think it's sad that women in Northern Ireland don't have that. However, laws must be enacted by the relevant political bodies. There's no point devolving power if you're just going to override it.
Of course, as you say, this is 'not a good look' politically, which I'm sure never crossed the minds of the parties pushing for the reformation (NB I'm sure it's not their only motivation).
On reformation: the EU will continue to change, but it'll just be ever more integration
TBH I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of devolution but that just might be my anti nationalist leanings. I am happy for a higher power to overrule in matters as important as this. I believe making abortion illegal just cuts off access to safe abortion for poorer women or less powerful if they have rich but unhelpful families/partners.
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
Power devolved is power retained (& to quote a certain Labour peer, had the aim of killing nationalism stone dead). Which nation do you think is retaining power in the context of UK devolution?
I have no real interest in the constructs of England, Wales or Scotland as nations, except maybe for the sake of football. I am fine with decisions being taken at a lesser level than UK government where it proves useful we obviously have councils for example for a reason and if there are actual good administration reasons you can justify mid level governance I just don't believe one area as fundamentally different people from the other based on a small geographical difference. Although I would be happy to take that one country thing to a further level with the EU in the future which is probably more of a minority position.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
Mr. Sandpit, there's been a lot of murmuring that the small inter-season regulation changes aren't going to make much difference at all.
The teams are on record as saying they’re actually quite significant aerodynamic changes, cars are a couple of seconds slower as a result. I guess we’ll see in a couple of weeks.
At least they’ve ended the madness of the hardest tyres on occasion being called the SuperSoft.
Some people, when faced with a crisis, a deadline, a seemingly insurmountable challenge, rise to the occasion. Cameron was able to do that. May is not. I think that @AlistairM is referring to this quality in his delightfully provocative last paragraph. After all, wouldn’t we all prefer a leader with such an ability at a time like this?
The same David Cameron who caused this whole sorry mess, by putting narrow Conservative party interests above all other considerations, and then ran away? No thanks...
I agree. Whoevee the answer is, it is not Cameron . it was his sloppy approach that caused this mess.
We need a leader who is able to rise to the occasion. Mrs May is not that leader. If you won’t take Cameron who had that ability on occasion, who?
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
You could argue that point both ways though, if a lot of jobs are being created despite the highly unstable political situation and uncertain Brexit outcome, then perhaps even in the event of no deal they will be required.
What's fascinating is the high numbers of self-employed people in the job stats and also the number of over 50s entering the work force. It's quite possible both are long-term trends. My economic objection to Brexit has always been that it will make the UK a far less enticing investment opportunity and that it will lead to a lot of jobs dependent on Single Market access moving to other parts of Europe. Both still look inevitable to me.
So no takers for Mr Cameron? Oh well. Still, someone is going to have to start being imaginative and flexible soon.
I think Mr Cameron is happy in his shed! I think the problem at the moment is that the EU is rigidly sticking to its agreed deal for all the reasons you mention. May knows that the easiest deal to get through the EU is the existing one perhaps without a backstop or with a time limited backstop (my preference as if A50 requires only a two year notice then it shouldn’t need to be more in backstop).
I have heard quite a lot of imaginative ideas in the last weeks - an irish article describing in detail a lot of the technological ways to avoid a hard border, and even that customs is moved to France for Ireland. I am sure there are more ideas out there but until the current deal is agreed or rejected then all the interesting ideas are being squashed out by the might of our civil service and the EU.
I don’t know what they’ve done with their methodology
But surely if they haven’t changed their methodology then it’s even worse
They’ve either made some dramatic changes to their assumptions to change the output by 50% or the model is incredibly sensitive to small changes in assumptions
If the former you’d be very sceptical about how they’d come up with the new assumptions. If the latter then I’d be worried about whether there is an error in the model.
Mr. Jezziah, I'm also not a fan of devolution, but so long as it exists then the appropriate spheres of authority should be adhered to.
In a way I agree but for an extreme example I assume you would happily support if N. Ireland tried to bring in slavery (which they aren't and can't but hypothetically) it is wrong to make these women suffer.I am also pro gay marriage but that doesn't have the same moral imperative.
Legal abortion should be made to be one of the costs of staying in a union with the UK. If N. Ireland said no and went independent I wouldn't advocate invasion or anything more than trying to positively influence them in that direction.
Europe’s quest for the quiet life goes much further. The EU and most of its states were born or reborn from the rubble of war and the traumas of totalitarianism. Britons forget how deeply that affects their instincts. History is dense, present, complicated and inescapable on the mainland in a way that it is not in Britain. Memories of flight, destruction and oppression – the 3am rap at the door, the rumble of military trucks on cobbles, the squelch of carts laden with possessions on muddy tracks – live on in continental families in a way that they do in comparatively few British ones.
The opposite of horror and cataclysm is the quiet life. Voltaire wrote his novel Candide in 1759 after the catastrophic Lisbon earthquake and amid the destruction of the Seven Years’ War. The book preaches neither Panglossian optimism nor head-in-hands gloom, and rather the stoical satisfaction of a peaceful plot of land providing for its owners’ needs under the maxim: “We must cultivate our garden.” In the shadow of horror and cataclysm, the modest goal of a happily cultivated garden is the height of decency and civilisation. More than grand rhetoric about continental unity or geopolitics or European culture, this is the real objective of the EU – and what holds it together. It is also the thing that Brits most struggle to understand.
By the same token, most Continental Europeans do not understand in their bones why many on this island have an attachment to the idea and reality of a nation-state, do not see why they should abandon it because others made a mess of theirs. The misunderstand goes both ways and is perhaps the result of very different experiences of - and perspectives on - a shared but not identical history.
A bit more emapthetic and imaginative understanding of the other’s perspective is needed on both sides of the Channel. And the Irish sea.
Mr. Sandpit, really? I was unaware of that, although, to be fair, the 'little difference' comment I should've specified more. I was referring to comments relating to the impact on ease of overtaking, but I was unaware of the slower times.
I don’t know what they’ve done with their methodology
But surely if they haven’t changed their methodology then it’s even worse
They’ve either made some dramatic changes to their assumptions to change the output by 50% or the model is incredibly sensitive to small changes in assumptions
If the former you’d be very sceptical about how they’d come up with the new assumptions. If the latter then I’d be worried about whether there is an error in the model.
Either way you wouldn’t be uncritical.
They explain their methodology. Given what has happened, the changes are unsurprising.
What is also sadly unsurprising is the extreme resistance of the death cult to inconvenient analysis.
Mr. Jezziah, will Westminster also seek to impose laws on devolved matters in Scotland and Wales? Just curious.
I fully support the right of women to have abortions, and think it's sad that women in Northern Ireland don't have that. However, laws must be enacted by the relevant political bodies. There's no point devolving power if you're just going to override it.
Of course, as you say, this is 'not a good look' politically, which I'm sure never crossed the minds of the parties pushing for the reformation (NB I'm sure it's not their only motivation).
On reformation: the EU will continue to change, but it'll just be ever more integration
TBH I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of devolution but that just might be my anti nationalist leanings. I am happy for a higher power to overrule in matters as important as this. I believe making abortion illegal just cuts off access to safe abortion for poorer women or less powerful if they have rich but unhelpful families/partners.
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
Power devolved is power retained (& to quote a certain Labour peer, had the aim of killing nationalism stone dead). Which nation do you think is retaining power in the context of UK devolution?
I have no real interest in the constructs of England, Wales or Scotland as nations, except maybe for the sake of football. I am fine with decisions being taken at a lesser level than UK government where it proves useful we obviously have councils for example for a reason and if there are actual good administration reasons you can justify mid level governance I just don't believe one area as fundamentally different people from the other based on a small geographical difference. Although I would be happy to take that one country thing to a further level with the EU in the future which is probably more of a minority position.
What about the construct of Ireland as a nation?
No real interest either, I have something of a natural aversion to countries that are North and South (or East West but it seems rarer) from when I was young, why not be united, but then I would be more than happy for Ireland to be united within the UK and then happier still for us to all be united within a larger construct which is maybe somewhat the case in the EU.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
You could argue that point both ways though, if a lot of jobs are being created despite the highly unstable political situation and uncertain Brexit outcome, then perhaps even in the event of no deal they will be required.
What's fascinating is the high numbers of self-employed people in the job stats and also the number of over 50s entering the work force. It's quite possible both are long-term trends. My economic objection to Brexit has always been that it will make the UK a far less enticing investment opportunity and that it will lead to a lot of jobs dependent on Single Market access moving to other parts of Europe. Both still look inevitable to me.
I wouldn’t claim to know much about job creation, and there are certainly more qualified people commenting here. I have however studied languages, and I think it is underestimated the importance of the English language. English is a convergence of the Northern European Germanic languages and Latin based Romance languages. This amongst other things has led to the international business language being English (much to the displeasure of the French). It is one of the reasons that explains why people travel through all of Europe to get to U.K. for new life through Asylum etc.
Now I’m not trying to hark back to Empire here like some of the Brexiteers - this is a structural advantage not related to but assisted by Empire and spread of English through commonwealth and US influence.
As such I think the role of London as an international business centre will probably remain
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
TBH all the right wing hate and rhetoric culminating in MPs getting targeted doesn't seem to have much impact on the polling so I'm not sure why this would either.
Not sure as to what you are referencing there but two points - right wing trolls don’t tend to be Tory trolls, and as with phone hacking MPs and Celebrities kind of sign up to getting attention for their profession so they should expect some attention from newspapers or political opponents. Not sure how this one will play out.
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Which Labour MP has suffered attempted murder?
I am aware of a London Labour MP who was attacked by an Islamist a few years ago. It would be utterly wrong and libellous to suggest that the Islamist was inspired by the Tories. There was a Lib Dem MP who was attacked by someone - who I think was mentally ill - and it was his agent who was killed. That was a few years ago. So who else?
And what are the links between the Tories and Britain First?
There is some appalling rhetoric out there and it comes from members and supporters of all parties. No party has a monopoly of virtue - or suffering, either.
Mr. Jezziah, will Westminster also seek to impose laws on devolved matters in Scotland and Wales? Just curious.
Of course, as you say, this is 'not a good look' politically, which I'm sure never crossed the minds of the parties pushing for the reformation (NB I'm sure it's not their only motivation).
On reformation: the EU will continue to change, but it'll just be ever more integration
TBH I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of devolution but that just might be my anti nationalist leanings. I am happy for a higher power to overrule in matters as important as this. I believe making abortion illegal just cuts off access to safe abortion for poorer women or less powerful if they have rich but unhelpful families/partners.
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
Power devolved is power retained (& to quote a certain Labour peer, had the aim of killing nationalism stone dead). Which nation do you think is retaining power in the context of UK devolution?
I have no real interest in the constructs of England, Wales or Scotland as nations, except maybe for the sake of football. I am fine with decisions being taken at a lesser level than UK government where it proves useful we obviously have councils for example for a reason and if there are actual good administration reasons you can justify mid level governance I just don't believe one area as fundamentally different people from the other based on a small geographical difference. Although I would be happy to take that one country thing to a further level with the EU in the future which is probably more of a minority position.
What about the construct of Ireland as a nation?
No real interest either, I have something of a natural aversion to countries that are North and South (or East West but it seems rarer) from when I was young, why not be united, but then I would be more than happy for Ireland to be united within the UK and then happier still for us to all be united within a larger construct which is maybe somewhat the case in the EU.
As a result of immigration and religious discrimination Ireland is certainly two communities and almost two nations. However, slowly, and perhaps largely as a result of sporting links the two parts are rediscovering their joint interests. It shouldn't be forgotten that Wolfe Tone and similar campaigners for independence were Protestants.
There's been some discussion about the possibility of a last-minute revocation just before the deadline in order to avoid No Deal, perhaps as Theresa May's last act as prime minister.
Does anyone have any thoughts on: (1) Whether from a legal point of view this would need the support of the cabinet. (2) How long it would take to make the necessary legislative changes. The legal Brexit date can be changed by regulations, but could that be done immediately, and are there any other changes that would need to be made by 29 March?
Europe’s quest for the quiet life goes much further. The EU and most of its states were born or reborn from the rubble of war and the traumas of totalitarianism. Britons forget how deeply that affects their instincts. History is dense, present, complicated and inescapable on the mainland in a way that it is not in Britain. Memories of flight, destruction and oppression – the 3am rap at the door, the rumble of military trucks on cobbles, the squelch of carts laden with possessions on muddy tracks – live on in continental families in a way that they do in comparatively few British ones.
The opposite of horror and cataclysm is the quiet life. Voltaire wrote his novel Candide in 1759 after the catastrophic Lisbon earthquake and amid the destruction of the Seven Years’ War. The book preaches neither Panglossian optimism nor head-in-hands gloom, and rather the stoical satisfaction of a peaceful plot of land providing for its owners’ needs under the maxim: “We must cultivate our garden.” In the shadow of horror and cataclysm, the modest goal of a happily cultivated garden is the height of decency and civilisation. More than grand rhetoric about continental unity or geopolitics or European culture, this is the real objective of the EU – and what holds it together. It is also the thing that Brits most struggle to understand.
By the same token, most Continental Europeans do not understand in their bones why many on this island have an attachment to the idea and reality of a nation-state, do not see why they should abandon it because others made a mess of theirs. The misunderstand goes both ways and is perhaps the result of very different experiences of - and perspectives on - a shared but not identical history.
A bit more emapthetic and imaginative understanding of the other’s perspective is needed on both sides of the Channel. And the Irish sea.
I think we are in a different position to a lot of Europe as borders aren’t just an arbitrary line drawn in fairly recent history. Most of our border is the coast, and therefore the longer existence of in the current form promotes attachment to nation state.
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Which Labour MP has suffered attempted murder?
I am aware of a London Labour MP who was attacked by an Islamist a few years ago. It would be utterly wrong and libellous to suggest that the Islamist was inspired by the Tories. There was a Lib Dem MP who was attacked by someone - who I think was mentally ill - and it was his agent who was killed. That was a few years ago. So who else?
And what are the links between the Tories and Britain First?
There is some appalling rhetoric out there and it comes from members and supporters of all parties. No party has a monopoly of virtue - or suffering, either.
There was a Labour MP whose murder was being planned and there was the guy who drove to the Mosque and killed a man but went there with the intention of getting Jeremy Corbyn and/or Sadiq Khan. Admittedly I should have said planning and was thinking of these incidents whilst inaccurately saying attempted (which isn't an accurate description of either really)
It seems awfully coincidental that these far right types target exactly the same types of people the aggressive right wing papers target. Anna Soubry the Conservative becoming a target of similar people who target Labour MPs when she become the target of exactly these papers is no surprise.
The Tories have plenty of dodgy links with far right sorts not sure about links with Britain first.
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
TBH all the right wing hate and rhetoric culminating in MPs getting targeted doesn't seem to have much impact on the polling so I'm not sure why this would either.
Not sure as to what you are referencing there but two points - right wing trolls don’t tend to be Tory trolls, and as with phone hacking MPs and Celebrities kind of sign up to getting attention for their profession so they should expect some attention from newspapers or political opponents. Not sure how this one will play out.
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Which Labour MP has suffered attempted murder?
I am aware of a London Labour MP who was attacked by an Islamist a few years ago. It would be utterly wrong and libellous to suggest that the Islamist was inspired by the Tories. There was a Lib Dem MP who was attacked by someone - who I think was mentally ill - and it was his agent who was killed. That was a few years ago. So who else?
And what are the links between the Tories and Britain First?
There is some appalling rhetoric out there and it comes from members and supporters of all parties. No party has a monopoly of virtue - or suffering, either.
Er, Ms Cyclefree. Jo Cox. Although there's absolutely no reason to believe that the Tories had any connection whatsoever with her murderer.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
You are just upset we don't condone racism against BAME groups anymore by supporting policies such as the hostile environment, which is why you pretend that Labour is now racist as you can't successfully argue for the racist policies to come back. No racist policies now sorry, try a different party.
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
You could argue that point both ways though, if a lot of jobs are being created despite the highly unstable political situation and uncertain Brexit outcome, then perhaps even in the event of no deal they will be required.
What's fascinating is the high numbers of self-employed people in the job stats and also the number of over 50s entering the work force. It's quite possible both are long-term trends. My economic objection to Brexit has always been that it will make the UK a far less enticing investment opportunity and that it will lead to a lot of jobs dependent on Single Market access moving to other parts of Europe. Both still look inevitable to me.
I wouldn’t claim to know much about job creation, and there are certainly more qualified people commenting here. I have however studied languages, and I think it is underestimated the importance of the English language. English is a convergence of the Northern European Germanic languages and Latin based Romance languages. This amongst other things has led to the international business language being English (much to the displeasure of the French). It is one of the reasons that explains why people travel through all of Europe to get to U.K. for new life through Asylum etc.
Now I’m not trying to hark back to Empire here like some of the Brexiteers - this is a structural advantage not related to but assisted by Empire and spread of English through commonwealth and US influence.
As such I think the role of London as an international business centre will probably remain
Yep - London and the SE East will be fine post-Brexit.
The thing about languages is that they can be learned and the fact that English is a universal language actually makes the fact we speak it a lot less important! Across the world young people are becoming familiar with English and may speak it it to a very high standard - even in France! I remember when I lived in Spain many years ago knowledge of English outside the big cities was almost non-existent. That has changed dramatically.
The EU in general and Ireland in particular seem to have made the same mistake in negotiating the terms of Brexit as Venizelos made. The best outcome is one that will actually stick, not the one with nominally the most favourable terms. It has been apparent for a very long time that Theresa May is not in secure control of Parliament and to proceed as if she is was reckless
You talk a lot of sense, by which I mean I agree. Though while I liked Cameron I'm not sure many would go for your last sentence in your header!
The EU is currently taking the line that it is for Britain to come up with a new position. Certainly Britain needs to do that
Thing is, while I don't see much hope in passing the deal sans backstop and expecting the EU to accept that, it is technically us coming up with a new position, just not one more favourable to the EU. But as much as I do blame May for not coming up with an actual plan B, if parliament were to pass the deal sans backstop she would be acting on instruction from parliament, the EU would be well within their rights to refuse but it is not as though May would be going off without backing.
I certainly share much of Mr Meeks' concern both at the prospect of a no deal on relations, for both sides (which makes the occasional person's glee that the EU is not sorting out our mess rather misplaced, since the point is not that it is good for us, but good for them for there to be a deal) and that even if the deal scrapes through it will be a long and bitter legacy.
But I see no solution. Remaining takes away the immediate problem of how to leave, by definition, but hardly addresses all the problems that caused it to win in the first place, as well as the problem of how parliament would feel comfortable cancelling Brexit, but in terms of flexibility the EU seems to have lost its much vaunted love of a last minute fudge and is behaving no different than any petty nationalist, willing to lose it all rather than concede, especially on a point no one seems to actually want to go through with. But they are not about to throw Ireland under the bus.
Setting aside for the moment that the U.K. has not handled this process well
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
Last night on More 4 I watched the documentary about “Night Must Fall”, the documentary made by Sydney Bernstein and Hitchcock, based on the films made by British and American soldiers when they got to Bergen-Belsen and Dachau and other camps. They also included film from Soviet cameramen who were filming at Auschwitz. The film was never seen at the time for political reasons - the Cold War was underway, Germany was beginning to be seen as an ally and the British did not want too much sympathy for the Jews in case it put the British under pressure over their refusal to stop Jewish refugees trying to get to Palestine.
The film does not spare us. It is unbelievably grim. It is very necessary. It needs to be seen once. I watched it with my son. But I and he wished we had not seen those images.
It is unbelievable and frightening that, according to a recent study, 1 in 20 of British people think the Holocaust did not happen.
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
TBH all the right wing hate and rhetoric culminating in MPs getting targeted doesn't seem to have much impact on the polling so I'm not sure why this would either.
Not sure as to what you are referencing there but two points - right wing trolls don’t tend to be Tory trolls, and as with phone hacking MPs and Celebrities kind of sign up to getting attention for their profession so they should expect some attention from newspapers or political opponents. Not sure how this one will play out.
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Not really sure how you are defining Tories unless you mean anyone with an opinion more right wing than your own. It is organisations like Britain first and idiots like Tommy Robinson and his UKIP appeasers and not the Tories. Again I will point out that Jo Cox was murdered by someone with mental health problems
‘Thomas Mair, a 52-year-old Batley and Spen constituent[43] who had a history of psychiatric problems, and links to the US-based neo-Nazi group National Alliance,[44] shouted "Britain first" as he carried out the attack.[11]’. From Wikipedia
Genuine question - In a No Deal Brexit scenario how does Ireland deciding not to create a hard border actually help the UK from a practical perspective? I don't see how it makes anything much better for us. What am I missing?
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
TBH all the right wing hate and rhetoric culminating in MPs getting targeted doesn't seem to have much impact on the polling so I'm not sure why this would either.
Not sure as to what you are referencing there but two points - right wing trolls don’t tend to be Tory trolls, and as with phone hacking MPs and Celebrities kind of sign up to getting attention for their profession so they should expect some attention from newspapers or political opponents. Not sure how this one will play out.
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Which Labour MP has suffered attempted murder?
I am aware of a London Labour MP who was attacked by an Islamist a few years ago. It would be utterly wrong and libellous to suggest that the Islamist was inspired by the Tories. There was a Lib Dem MP who was attacked by someone - who I think was mentally ill - and it was his agent who was killed. That was a few years ago. So who else?
And what are the links between the Tories and Britain First?
There is some appalling rhetoric out there and it comes from members and supporters of all parties. No party has a monopoly of virtue - or suffering, either.
Er, Ms Cyclefree. Jo Cox. Although there's absolutely no reason to believe that the Tories had any connection whatsoever with her murderer.
I took that as given.
I was genuinely curious about which other Labour MP had suffered an attempted murder. @The Jezziah has now responded and has admitted that his wording was not accurate.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
You are just upset we don't condone racism against BAME groups anymore by supporting policies such as the hostile environment, which is why you pretend that Labour is now racist as you can't successfully argue for the racist policies to come back. No racist policies now sorry, try a different party.
Plenty of racist behaviour, though. I don't think Jewish Labour MP's and activists are lying when they talk of the abuse they've suffered at the hands of people who claim to be on their side of the political divide.
The EU in general and Ireland in particular seem to have made the same mistake in negotiating the terms of Brexit as Venizelos made. The best outcome is one that will actually stick, not the one with nominally the most favourable terms. It has been apparent for a very long time that Theresa May is not in secure control of Parliament and to proceed as if she is was reckless
You talk a lot of sense, by which I mean I agree. Though while I liked Cameron I'm not sure many would go for your last sentence in your header!
The EU is currently taking the line that it is for Britain to come up with a new position. Certainly Britain needs to do that
Thing is, backing.
I certainly share much of Mr Meeks' concern both at the prospect of a no deal on relations, for both sides (which makes the occasional person's glee that the EU is not sorting out our mess rather misplaced, since the point is not that it is good for us, but good for them for there to be a deal) and that even if the deal scrapes through it will be a long and bitter legacy.
But the bus.
Setting aside for the moment that the U.K. has not handled this process well
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
May's red lines have defined the parameters within which discussions have taken place. She ruled out a lot of creative thinking by stating in advance there were certain things that the UK would not contemplate. I wonder if she took advice in advance of announcing them and how much notice she took of any advice she was given.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
Last night on More 4 I watched the documentary about “Night Must Fall”, the documentary made by Sydney Bernstein and Hitchcock, based on the films made by British and American soldiers when they got to Bergen-Belsen and Dachau and other camps. They also included film from Soviet cameramen who were filming at Auschwitz. The film was never seen at the time for political reasons - the Cold War was underway, Germany was beginning to be seen as an ally and the British did not want too much sympathy for the Jews in case it put the British under pressure over their refusal to stop Jewish refugees trying to get to Palestine.
The film does not spare us. It is unbelievably grim. It is very necessary. It needs to be seen once. I watched it with my son. But I and he wished we had not seen those images.
It is unbelievable and frightening that, according to a recent study, 1 in 20 of British people think the Holocaust did not happen.
The one in twenty know that it happened and approve it, but can't say so.
As a side issue to the Express story, the Riley story should be sending serious panic in Lab strategy circles.
This is pure middle england, early evening viewers. Marginal catnip.
Good luck Labour.
Pretty Blonde harassed and in need of bodyguard for saying Corbyn has anti semitism problem. This is the kind of fantasy headline and photo for right wing tabloids. Whether newspaper have the influence they had in the past I don’t know but they can set the agenda - I’ve always Ben astounded on the cut through when white blonde middle class woman gets murdered /kidnapped compared to poor ethnic minorities.
TBH all the right wing hate and rhetoric culminating in MPs getting targeted doesn't seem to have much impact on the polling so I'm not sure why this would either.
Not sure as to what you are referencing there but two points - right wing trolls don’t tend to be Tory trolls, and as with phone hacking MPs and Celebrities kind of sign up to getting attention for their profession so they should expect some attention from newspapers or political opponents. Not sure how this one will play out.
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Not really sure how you are defining Tories unless you mean anyone with an opinion more right wing than your own. It is organisations like Britain first and idiots like Tommy Robinson and his UKIP appeasers and not the Tories. Again I will point out that Jo Cox was murdered by someone with mental health problems
‘Thomas Mair, a 52-year-old Batley and Spen constituent[43] who had a history of psychiatric problems, and links to the US-based neo-Nazi group National Alliance,[44] shouted "Britain first" as he carried out the attack.[11]’. From Wikipedia
It is no coincidence that they go for much the same people the right wing press go for which are for all intents and purposes the Tories (or their supporters) Anna Soubry and others starting to get the same negative attention many Labour MPs suffer is no coincidence. Some of the biggest nutters and the ones who take action usually have no direct links themselves but they share the same opponents.
Not a good look for the Tories among the younger crowd and women voters.
It’s a devolved power
I think it’s a good thing that Westminster respects the constitution
It’s disingenuous of the supporters of this measure to make this claim. It is shameful that they would try to override the rights of NI to determine their own wishes
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Which Labour MP has suffered attempted murder?
I am aware of a London Labour MP who was attacked by an Islamist a few years ago. It would be utterly wrong and libellous to suggest that the Islamist was inspired by the Tories. There was a Lib Dem MP who was attacked by someone - who I think was mentally ill - and it was his agent who was killed. That was a few years ago. So who else?
And what are the links between the Tories and Britain First?
There is some appalling rhetoric out there and it comes from members and supporters of all parties. No party has a monopoly of virtue - or suffering, either.
There was a Labour MP whose murder was being planned and there was the guy who drove to the Mosque and killed a man but went there with the intention of getting Jeremy Corbyn and/or Sadiq Khan. Admittedly I should have said planning and was thinking of these incidents whilst inaccurately saying attempted (which isn't an accurate description of either really)
It seems awfully coincidental that these far right types target exactly the same types of people the aggressive right wing papers target. Anna Soubry the Conservative becoming a target of similar people who target Labour MPs when she become the target of exactly these papers is no surprise.
The Tories have plenty of dodgy links with far right sorts not sure about links with Britain first.
If you are not sure that there are links between the Tories and Britain First then you should not make such accusations. It is not just individuals who can be defamed but groups also.
I see Phil has apologised to the unfortunate woman whose car he trundled in front of. I thought we'd been assured that protocol demanded that the monarch & her consort never apologised? We have truly reached the end of days.
I think it’s a great thing that our constitution is so flexible
I think it’s a good thing that Westminster respects the constitution
It’s disingenuous of the supporters of this measure to make this claim. It is shameful that they would try to override the rights of NI to determine their own wishes
But imposing Brexit against the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland is ok?
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
You are just upset we don't condone racism against BAME groups anymore by supporting policies such as the hostile environment, which is why you pretend that Labour is now racist as you can't successfully argue for the racist policies to come back. No racist policies now sorry, try a different party.
Plenty of racist behaviour, though. I don't think Jewish Labour MP's and activists are lying when they talk of the abuse they've suffered at the hands of people who claim to be on their side of the political divide.
And the ones racially abused for being left wing?
The apparent anti anti semitism organisations such as LAAS that block various Jewish Labour members and attack them on social media?
I realise these are much less of a concern for many of the right because they can't be used to target Corbyn but I am always interested in consistency.
Personally I take each case on its merit. Rachel Riley claiming 'Chomski' is an anti semite is a severe dent in the one she brings...
The EU in general and Ireland in particular seem to have made the same mistake in negotiating the terms of Brexit as Venizelos made. The best outcome is one that will actually stick, not the one with nominally the most favourable terms. It has been apparent for a very long time that Theresa May is not in secure control of Parliament and to proceed as if she is was reckless
You talk a lot of sense, by which I mean I agree. Though while I liked Cameron I'm not sure many would go for your last sentence in your header!
The EU is currently taking the line that it is for Britain to come up with a new position. Certainly Britain needs to do that
Thing is, backing.
I certainly share much of Mr Meeks' concern both at the prospect of a no deal on relations, for both sides (which makes the occasional person's glee that the EU is not sorting out our mess rather misplaced, since the point is not that it is good for us, but good for them for there to be a deal) and that even if the deal scrapes through it will be a long and bitter legacy.
But the bus.
Setting aside for the moment that the U.K. has not handled this process well
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
May's red lines have defined the parameters within which discussions have taken place. She ruled out a lot of creative thinking by stating in advance there were certain things that the UK would not contemplate. I wonder if she took advice in advance of announcing them and how much notice she took of any advice she was given.
It is probably accurate to say that she took little advice and little heed of any advice she did receive. Hence Ivan Rogers departure and the painted corner we’re now in.
I don't think Labours "permanent customs union" is quite the same as the EU's one. A significant number of Tories would probably have no problem with the Labour one as described. The point is that isn't remotely on offer.
The Government's position on leaving the Single Market, Customs Union etc isn't due to ideological opposition to those things in isolation. It is because being in them imposes other restrictions (most obviously Freedom of Movement, also "ability to strike own trade deals) and they've had to pick between the two.
Labour's position is effectively that under their brilliant negotiating the EU would give in on these points.
"There was a lot of criticism of David Cameron as being an essay crisis Prime Minister. Right now I for one would be fully in favour of having an essay crisis Prime Minister: it is exactly what the time requires. Is there any chance of luring him out from his shed?"
We'd first have to disentangle his Orlebar Brown's from his Costa Rican sun lounger. Getting him to practice coprophagia is tempting but I don't think it would be in the interests of the UK. Better we forget about rehabilitation and just banish him and Samantha to a post Brexit Hartlepool.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
Last night on More 4 I watched the documentary about “Night Must Fall”, the documentary made by Sydney Bernstein and Hitchcock, based on the films made by British and American soldiers when they got to Bergen-Belsen and Dachau and other camps. They also included film from Soviet cameramen who were filming at Auschwitz. The film was never seen at the time for political reasons - the Cold War was underway, Germany was beginning to be seen as an ally and the British did not want too much sympathy for the Jews in case it put the British under pressure over their refusal to stop Jewish refugees trying to get to Palestine.
The film does not spare us. It is unbelievably grim. It is very necessary. It needs to be seen once. I watched it with my son. But I and he wished we had not seen those images.
It is unbelievable and frightening that, according to a recent study, 1 in 20 of British people think the Holocaust did not happen.
I'm not that surprised. Most societies have a lunatic fringe of at least 5% who believe in or don't believe in the craziest things, and I expect an even higher number think the moonlandings were faked or have seen Elvis.
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
You are just upset we don't condone racism against BAME groups anymore by supporting policies such as the hostile environment, which is why you pretend that Labour is now racist as you can't successfully argue for the racist policies to come back. No racist policies now sorry, try a different party.
Why would I be upset that Labour does not condone racism against BAME groups? I wish that were the case.
Why would an anti-racist party allow Chris Williamson to sit on its benches in the Commons or allow Jim Sheridan to remain a member?
I think it’s a good thing that Westminster respects the constitution
It’s disingenuous of the supporters of this measure to make this claim. It is shameful that they would try to override the rights of NI to determine their own wishes
But imposing Brexit against the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland is ok?
In the third quarter of last year, 51% of the country’s total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) was with the rest of the EU. The figures for exports were 46% for total trade and 49% for goods. That’s a lot of trade to risk with barriers.
You could argue that point both ways though, if a lot of jobs are being created despite the highly unstable political situation and uncertain Brexit outcome, then perhaps even in the event of no deal they will be required.
What's fascinating is the high numbers of self-employed people in the job stats and also the number of over 50s entering the work force. It's quite possible both are long-term trends. My economic objection to Brexit has always been that it will make the UK a far less enticing investment opportunity and that it will lead to a lot of jobs dependent on Single Market access moving to other parts of Europe. Both still look inevitable to me.
I wouldn’t claim to know much about job creation, and there are certainly more qualified people commenting here. I have however studied languages, and I think it is underestimated the importance of the English language. English is a convergence of the Northern European Germanic languages and Latin based Romance languages. This amongst other things has led to the international business language being English (much to the displeasure of the French). It is one of the reasons that explains why people travel through all of Europe to get to U.K. for new life through Asylum etc.
Now I’m not trying to hark back to Empire here like some of the Brexiteers - this is a structural advantage not related to but assisted by Empire and spread of English through commonwealth and US influence.
As such I think the role of London as an international business centre will probably remain
Yep - London and the SE East will be fine post-Brexit.
The thing about languages is that they can be learned and the fact that English is a universal language actually makes the fact we speak it a lot less important! Across the world young people are becoming familiar with English and may speak it it to a very high standard - even in France! I remember when I lived in Spain many years ago knowledge of English outside the big cities was almost non-existent. That has changed dramatically.
Nonsense. It means English people can communicate and get work or do business anywhere in the world. That is a big advantage for us.
Being a native speaker of "proper" English also carries prestige and weight.
I don’t know what they’ve done with their methodology
But surely if they haven’t changed their methodology then it’s even worse
They’ve either made some dramatic changes to their assumptions to change the output by 50% or the model is incredibly sensitive to small changes in assumptions
If the former you’d be very sceptical about how they’d come up with the new assumptions. If the latter then I’d be worried about whether there is an error in the model.
Either way you wouldn’t be uncritical.
They explain their methodology. Given what has happened, the changes are unsurprising.
What is also sadly unsurprising is the extreme resistance of the death cult to inconvenient analysis.
Not that much has actually changed in the 6 (or 12?) months since the last update
As for “resistance from the death cult” you’ve just had @FrancisUrquhart expressing scepticism on the magnitude of the change
Labour is a text-book example of an institutionally racist organisation. In fact, text books will be written about the fact that a supposedly anti-racist political party refuses to allow a specific ethnic minority to define the racism it suffers while allowing those who attack that minority free rein to do so.
We were, which is why the party supported the hostile environment, although in fairness the Tories really took that on and made it their own. Luckily the left came in to clean up the parties act, much to the dismay of many hostile environment supporters.
These days, Labour's hostile environment is reserved for Jews. They are not allowed to define the racism they face and can be attacked, insulted and demeaned by Labour members consequence-free - as the Jim Sheridan example and Chris Williamson's continued presence on the Labour benches in the Commons demonstrate.
You are just upset we don't condone racism against BAME groups anymore by supporting policies such as the hostile environment, which is why you pretend that Labour is now racist as you can't successfully argue for the racist policies to come back. No racist policies now sorry, try a different party.
Plenty of racist behaviour, though. I don't think Jewish Labour MP's and activists are lying when they talk of the abuse they've suffered at the hands of people who claim to be on their side of the political divide.
And the ones racially abused for being left wing?
The apparent anti anti semitism organisations such as LAAS that block various Jewish Labour members and attack them on social media?
I realise these are much less of a concern for many of the right because they can't be used to target Corbyn but I am always interested in consistency.
Personally I take each case on its merit. Rachel Riley claiming 'Chomski' is an anti semite is a severe dent in the one she brings...
The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.
Which Labour MP has suffered attempted murder?
I am aware of a London Labour MP who was attacked by an Islamist a few years ago. It would be utterly wrong and libellous to suggest that the Islamist was inspired by the Tories. There was a Lib Dem MP who was attacked by someone - who I think was mentally ill - and it was his agent who was killed. That was a few years ago. So who else?
And what are the links between the Tories and Britain First?
There is some appalling rhetoric out there and it comes from members and supporters of all parties. No party has a monopoly of virtue - or suffering, either.
There was a Labour MP whose murder was being planned and there was the guy who drove to the Mosque and killed a man but went there with the intention of getting Jeremy Corbyn and/or Sadiq Khan. Admittedly I should have said planning and was thinking of these incidents whilst inaccurately saying attempted (which isn't an accurate description of either really)
It seems awfully coincidental that these far right types target exactly the same types of people the aggressive right wing papers target. Anna Soubry the Conservative becoming a target of similar people who target Labour MPs when she become the target of exactly these papers is no surprise.
The Tories have plenty of dodgy links with far right sorts not sure about links with Britain first.
If you are not sure that there are links between the Tories and Britain First then you should not make such accusations. It is not just individuals who can be defamed but groups also.
I didn't make such accusations.
'The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.'
That doesn't say there are links between Tories and Britain first.
It does point out that much of their rhetoric and that of their supporters such as the RW press leads to this.
TBH people can get away with lies about Corbyn and Labour then I am on very safe ground making accurate statements about the rhetoric of the right wing press.
The EU in general and Ireland in particular seem to have made the same mistake in negotiating the terms of Brexit as Venizelos made. The best outcome is one that will actually stick, not the one with nominally the most favourable terms. It has been apparent for a very long time that Theresa May is not in secure control of Parliament and to proceed as if she is was reckless
You talk a lot of sense, by which I mean I agree. Though while I liked Cameron I'm not sure many would go for your last sentence in your header!
The EU is currently taking the line that it is for Britain to come up with a new position. Certainly Britain needs to do that
Thing is, backing.
I certainly share much of Mr Meeks' concern both at the prospect of a no deal on relations, for both sides (which makes the occasional person's glee that the EU is not sorting out our mess rather misplaced, since the point is not that it is good for us, but good for them for there to be a deal) and that even if the deal scrapes through it will be a long and bitter legacy.
But the bus.
Setting aside for the moment that the U.K. has not handled this process well
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
May's red lines have defined the parameters within which discussions have taken place. She ruled out a lot of creative thinking by stating in advance there were certain things that the UK would not contemplate. I wonder if she took advice in advance of announcing them and how much notice she took of any advice she was given.
It is probably accurate to say that she took little advice and little heed of any advice she did receive. Hence Ivan Rogers departure and the painted corner we’re now in.
One of the really big mistakes the UK government and the Brexiteers generally have made is in not seeking to engage with voters in the EU27. Instead, they have always thought that a key to a good Brexit deal is shaping public opinion in the UK. IN fact, the way to get a good deal is to put politicians in the EU27 under domestic pressure. May's red lines and the clueless offensiveness of people like Johnson, Raab and Davis ensured that never happened.
The EU in general and Ireland in particular seem to have made the same mistake in negotiating the terms of Brexit as Venizelos made. The best outcome is one that will actually stick, not the one with nominally the most favourable terms. It has been apparent for a very long time that Theresa May is not in secure control of Parliament and to proceed as if she is was reckless
You talk a lot of sense, by which I mean I agree. Though while I liked Cameron I'm not sure many would go for your last sentence in your header!
The EU is currently taking the line that it is for Britain to come up with a new position. Certainly Britain needs to do that
Thing is, while I don't see much hope in passing the deal sans backstop and expecting the EU to accept that, it is technically us coming up with a new position, just not one more favourable to the EU. But as much as I do blame May for not coming up with an actual plan B, if parliament were to pass the deal sans backstop she would be acting on instruction from parliament, the EU would be well within their rights to refuse but it is not as though May would be going off without backing.
But I see no solution. Remaining takes away the immediate problem of how to leave, by definition, but hardly addresses all the problems that caused it to win in the first place, as well as the problem of how parliament would feel comfortable cancelling Brexit, but in terms of flexibility the EU seems to have lost its much vaunted love of a last minute fudge and is behaving no different than any petty nationalist, willing to lose it all rather than concede, especially on a point no one seems to actually want to go through with. But they are not about to throw Ireland under the bus.
Setting aside for the moment that the U.K. has not handled this process well
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
For many European countries the EU is an emotional project and the fact the UK voted to Leave has also been treated very emotionally as a consequence.
The irony is the total inability of the EU to understand the very different emotions it can itself provoke in the UK just by being emotional itself.
No real interest either, I have something of a natural aversion to countries that are North and South (or East West but it seems rarer) from when I was young, why not be united, but then I would be more than happy for Ireland to be united within the UK and then happier still for us to all be united within a larger construct which is maybe somewhat the case in the EU.
I guess you must deplore that much of your leader's parliamentary career was hugely interested in, not to say obsessed with, the construct of Ireland as a nation. Of course as a late convert to political realism, Corbyn (as with so many other areas) has learned to keep his trap shut on the issue.
Mr. Jezziah, will Westminster also seek to impose laws on devolved matters in
On reformation: the EU will continue to change, but it'll just be ever more integration
TBH I'm not exactly a huge fan of the idea of devolution but that just might be my anti nationalist leanings. I am happy for a higher power to overrule in matters as important as this. I believe making abortion illegal just cuts off access to safe abortion for poorer women or less powerful if they have rich but unhelpful families/partners.
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
Power devolved is power retained (& to quote a certain Labour peer, had the aim of killing nationalism stone dead). Which nation do you think is retaining power in the context of UK devolution?
I have no real interest in the constructs of England, Wales or Scotland as nations, except maybe for the sake of football. I am fine with decisions being taken at a lesser level than UK government where it proves useful we obviously have councils for example for a reason and if there are actual good administration reasons you can justify mid level governance I just don't believe one area as fundamentally different people from the other based on a small geographical difference. Although I would be happy to take that one country thing to a further level with the EU in the future which is probably more of a minority position.
What about the construct of Ireland as a nation?
No real interest either, I have something of a natural aversion to countries that are North and South (or East West but it seems rarer) from when I was young, why not be united, but then I would be more than happy for Ireland to be united within the UK and then happier still for us to all be united within a larger construct which is maybe somewhat the case in the EU.
As a result of immigration and religious discrimination Ireland is certainly two communities and almost two nations. However, slowly, and perhaps largely as a result of sporting links the two parts are rediscovering their joint interests. It shouldn't be forgotten that Wolfe Tone and similar campaigners for independence were Protestants.
The Irish government has been actively marketing to the Ascendants to get them to relocate back to Ireland. That’s quite a stunning shift in mindset
I think it’s a good thing that Westminster respects the constitution
It’s disingenuous of the supporters of this measure to make this claim. It is shameful that they would try to override the rights of NI to determine their own wishes
But imposing Brexit against the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland is ok?
Brexit is not a devolved matter.
And their devolved assembly had to be dissolved because they were up to their necks in corruption.
Europe’s quest for the quiet life goes much further. The EU and most of its states were born or reborn from the rubble of war and the traumas of totalitarianism. Britons forget how deeply that affects their instincts. History is dense, present, complicated and inescapable on the mainland in a way that it is not in Britain. Memories of flight, destruction and oppression – the 3am rap at the door, the rumble of military trucks on cobbles, the squelch of carts laden with possessions on muddy tracks – live on in continental families in a way that they do in comparatively few British ones.
The opposite of horror and cataclysm is the quiet life. Voltaire wrote his novel Candide in 1759 after the catastrophic Lisbon earthquake and amid the destruction of the Seven Years’ War. The book preaches neither Panglossian optimism nor head-in-hands gloom, and rather the stoical satisfaction of a peaceful plot of land providing for its owners’ needs under the maxim: “We must cultivate our garden.” In the shadow of horror and cataclysm, the modest goal of a happily cultivated garden is the height of decency and civilisation. More than grand rhetoric about continental unity or geopolitics or European culture, this is the real objective of the EU – and what holds it together. It is also the thing that Brits most struggle to understand.
By the same token, most Continental Europeans do not understand in their bones why many on this island have an attachment to the idea and reality of a nation-state, do not see why they should abandon it because others made a mess of theirs. The misunderstand goes both ways and is perhaps the result of very different experiences of - and perspectives on - a shared but not identical history.
A bit more emapthetic and imaginative understanding of the other’s perspective is needed on both sides of the Channel. And the Irish sea.
But Britain is not a Nation-State - it is a multi-nation state. It is the Little-Englanders and Ultra-Brexiteers who do not acknowledge this that will turn their perception into a reality (albeit with a smaller geographical area)
I see Phil has apologised to the unfortunate woman whose car he trundled in front of. I thought we'd been assured that protocol demanded that the monarch & her consort never apologised? We have truly reached the end of days.
I think it’s a great thing that our constitution is so flexible
😝
'Whatever you do, don't put anything down in writing.'
I don't think Labours "permanent customs union" is quite the same as the EU's one. A significant number of Tories would probably have no problem with the Labour one as described. The point is that isn't remotely on offer.
Labours permanent customs union is pretty much the same as the EU's, the review of trade deals before the UK accepts them would be rubber stamping. The ability to sign our own trade deals only existing in some incredibly narrow hypothetical that doesn't exist.
The single market I am less sure on but Labour may fudge that somewhat. Although this second point is probably unavailable as I don't think Labour will actually get the chance to negotiate.
The EU in general and Ireland in particular seem to have made the same mistake in negotiating the terms of Brexit as Venizelos made. The best outcome is one that will actually stick, not the one with nominally the most favourable terms. It has been apparent for a very long time that Theresa May is not in secure control of Parliament and to proceed as if she is was reckless
You talk a lot of sense, by which I mean I agree. Though while I liked Cameron I'm not sure many would go for your last sentence in your header!
The EU is currently taking the line that it is for Britain to come up with a new position. Certainly Britain needs to do that
Thing is, backing.
I certainly share much of Mr Meeks' concern both at the prospect of a no deal on relations, for both sides (which makes the occasional person's glee that the EU is not sorting out our mess rather misplaced, since the point is not that it is good for us, but good for them for there to be a deal) and that even if the deal scrapes through it will be a long and bitter legacy.
But the bus.
Setting aside for the moment that the U.K. has not handled this process well
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
May's red lines have defined the parameters within which discussions have taken place. She ruled out a lot of creative thinking by stating in advance there were certain things that the UK would not contemplate. I wonder if she took advice in advance of announcing them and how much notice she took of any advice she was given.
It is probably accurate to say that she took little advice and little heed of any advice she did receive. Hence Ivan Rogers departure and the painted corner we’re now in.
Unfortunately, Ivan Rogers was sullied by being the principal architect of Cameron's renegotiation, which was then rejected, so his advice subsequently always had a cloud hanging over it.
The EU in general and Ireland in particular seem to have made the same mistake in negotiating the terms of Brexit as Venizelos made. The best outcome is one that will actually stick, not the one with nominally the most favourable terms. It has been apparent for a very long time that Theresa May is not in secure control of Parliament and to proceed as if she is was reckless
You talk a lot of sense, by which I mean I agree. Though while I liked Cameron I'm not sure many would go for your last sentence in your header!
The EU is currently taking the line that it is for Britain to come up with a new position. Certainly Britain needs to do that
Thing is, backing.
I certainly share much of Mr Meeks' concern both at the prospect of a no deal on relations, for both sides (which makes the occasional person's glee that the EU is not sorting out our mess rather misplaced, since the point is not that it is good for us, but good for them for there to be a deal) and that even if the deal scrapes through it will be a long and bitter legacy.
But the bus.
Setting aside for the moment that the U.K. has not handled this process well
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
May's red lines have defined the parameters within which discussions have taken place. She ruled out a lot of creative thinking by stating in advance there were certain things that the UK would not contemplate. I wonder if she took advice in advance of announcing them and how much notice she took of any advice she was given.
Not really. There are liabilities that need to be negotiated, citizens rights and other bits and pieces. Those are complex but not fundamental issues of principle
If you are saying that wanting to be outside FoM means no deal can be done that that is a lack of flexibility on the EUs part. I u serstabdcthey want FoM because it is hugely beneficial for them but that’s not the same as it being essential
Comments
However, doesn't it strike you as significant that the Tories do well when women vote for them and otherwise do badly?
Although my point was more towards the not a good look point and yes I'm sure that did cross the mind of those pushing it but I would be surprised if any of them don't genuinely believe in the proposal of legal abortion in N.Ireland even if they also have ulterior motives
It might be the result of our electoral system which gives huge power to relatively small numbers of voters (35% strategy, anyone?) but I think it's also to do with the highly adverserial nature of our politics.
And it probably doesn't help that our politicians are all selfish numpties.
Have a good morning.
Even as a Europhile then, I felt embarrassed at the one-sided media. The few honest politicians who pointed out the potential faults had little air-time, and those who wanted to be even-handed were crowded out.
The opposite of horror and cataclysm is the quiet life. Voltaire wrote his novel Candide in 1759 after the catastrophic Lisbon earthquake and amid the destruction of the Seven Years’ War. The book preaches neither Panglossian optimism nor head-in-hands gloom, and rather the stoical satisfaction of a peaceful plot of land providing for its owners’ needs under the maxim: “We must cultivate our garden.” In the shadow of horror and cataclysm, the modest goal of a happily cultivated garden is the height of decency and civilisation. More than grand rhetoric about continental unity or geopolitics or European culture, this is the real objective of the EU – and what holds it together. It is also the thing that Brits most struggle to understand.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/27/britons-do-not-grasp-the-eu-essential-motivation-a-quest-for-the-quiet-life
There were ample discussions at the time on issues of sovereignty and direction of travel, such as this prime time debate, incidentally much more civilised and intelligent than current debates:
https://youtu.be/CuZrzwm6CJs
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/david-smith-the-jobs-keep-coming-but-where-do-they-come-from-q2tts7j2m?shareToken=6a3874b5217d758b92ae10543fb48ad5
I was 25 at the time so I had other things to do (I got married later that year). In my dotage, I'd probably enjoy an intellectual debate like that. Is that why I come here?
But most people would happily switch over to the soaps. Now if we'd had a 'common market' discussion in 'Coronation Street'?
In those circumstances Corbyn could increase English corporation tax and the devolved powers could undercut English rates to attract English businesses to move base within the UK
It is no wonder Corbyn and labour do not want devolution
The more difficult question is what to do about it.
At least they’ve ended the madness of the hardest tyres on occasion being called the SuperSoft.
I have heard quite a lot of imaginative ideas in the last weeks - an irish article describing in detail a lot of the technological ways to avoid a hard border, and even that customs is moved to France for Ireland. I am sure there are more ideas out there but until the current deal is agreed or rejected then all the interesting ideas are being squashed out by the might of our civil service and the EU.
Re the new analysis
I don’t know what they’ve done with their methodology
But surely if they haven’t changed their methodology then it’s even worse
They’ve either made some dramatic changes to their assumptions to change the output by 50% or the model is incredibly sensitive to small changes in assumptions
If the former you’d be very sceptical about how they’d come up with the new assumptions. If the latter then I’d be worried about whether there is an error in the model.
Either way you wouldn’t be uncritical.
Legal abortion should be made to be one of the costs of staying in a union with the UK. If N. Ireland said no and went independent I wouldn't advocate invasion or anything more than trying to positively influence them in that direction.
By the same token, most Continental Europeans do not understand in their bones why many on this island have an attachment to the idea and reality of a nation-state, do not see why they should abandon it because others made a mess of theirs. The misunderstand goes both ways and is perhaps the result of very different experiences of - and perspectives on - a shared but not identical history.
A bit more emapthetic and imaginative understanding of the other’s perspective is needed on both sides of the Channel. And the Irish sea.
What is also sadly unsurprising is the extreme resistance of the death cult to inconvenient analysis.
Now I’m not trying to hark back to Empire here like some of the Brexiteers - this is a structural advantage not related to but assisted by Empire and spread of English through commonwealth and US influence.
As such I think the role of London as an international business centre will probably remain
I am aware of a London Labour MP who was attacked by an Islamist a few years ago. It would be utterly wrong and libellous to suggest that the Islamist was inspired by the Tories. There was a Lib Dem MP who was attacked by someone - who I think was mentally ill - and it was his agent who was killed. That was a few years ago. So who else?
And what are the links between the Tories and Britain First?
There is some appalling rhetoric out there and it comes from members and supporters of all parties. No party has a monopoly of virtue - or suffering, either.
However, slowly, and perhaps largely as a result of sporting links the two parts are rediscovering their joint interests.
It shouldn't be forgotten that Wolfe Tone and similar campaigners for independence were Protestants.
Does anyone have any thoughts on:
(1) Whether from a legal point of view this would need the support of the cabinet.
(2) How long it would take to make the necessary legislative changes. The legal Brexit date can be changed by regulations, but could that be done immediately, and are there any other changes that would need to be made by 29 March?
It seems awfully coincidental that these far right types target exactly the same types of people the aggressive right wing papers target. Anna Soubry the Conservative becoming a target of similar people who target Labour MPs when she become the target of exactly these papers is no surprise.
The Tories have plenty of dodgy links with far right sorts not sure about links with Britain first.
The thing about languages is that they can be learned and the fact that English is a universal language actually makes the fact we speak it a lot less important! Across the world young people are becoming familiar with English and may speak it it to a very high standard - even in France! I remember when I lived in Spain many years ago knowledge of English outside the big cities was almost non-existent. That has changed dramatically.
MPs have been murdered on all sides. Airy Neave also springs to mind
Do you not think it extraordinary that a group of mature western democracies cannot agree a mutually sensible separation?
Politicians should be able to look beyond the “but they told us to fuck off” line some on here like
The fundamental strategic interest of the West is having a close relationship between the EU and the U.K. with both being prosperous. The EU (and Ireland - internal politics with Varadker worrying about being outflanked by SF - is hugely to blame for this possible mess).
The film does not spare us. It is unbelievably grim. It is very necessary. It needs to be seen once. I watched it with my son. But I and he wished we had not seen those images.
It is unbelievable and frightening that, according to a recent study, 1 in 20 of British people think the Holocaust did not happen.
‘Thomas Mair, a 52-year-old Batley and Spen constituent[43] who had a history of psychiatric problems, and links to the US-based neo-Nazi group National Alliance,[44] shouted "Britain first" as he carried out the attack.[11]’. From Wikipedia
Jeremy right again, it must get tiring for him.
I was genuinely curious about which other Labour MP had suffered an attempted murder. @The Jezziah has now responded and has admitted that his wording was not accurate.
And Ian Gow. Both by the IRA. The IRA also tried to murder Mrs Thatcher and other Tory MPs and managed to kill and severely wound some of their wives.
There was one Labour MP at the time who was not particularly bothered by this. I wonder what happened to him.
It would have to be a retired politician and ex-leaders would be too toxic. So a senior well known non-Leader from days gone by.....
I think it’s a good thing that Westminster respects the constitution
It’s disingenuous of the supporters of this measure to make this claim. It is shameful that they would try to override the rights of NI to determine their own wishes
😝
The apparent anti anti semitism organisations such as LAAS that block various Jewish Labour members and attack them on social media?
I realise these are much less of a concern for many of the right because they can't be used to target Corbyn but I am always interested in consistency.
Personally I take each case on its merit. Rachel Riley claiming 'Chomski' is an anti semite is a severe dent in the one she brings...
Ken Clarke?
The Government's position on leaving the Single Market, Customs Union etc isn't due to ideological opposition to those things in isolation. It is because being in them imposes other restrictions (most obviously Freedom of Movement, also "ability to strike own trade deals) and they've had to pick between the two.
Labour's position is effectively that under their brilliant negotiating the EU would give in on these points.
We'd first have to disentangle his Orlebar Brown's from his Costa Rican sun lounger. Getting him to practice coprophagia is tempting but I don't think it would be in the interests of the UK. Better we forget about rehabilitation and just banish him and Samantha to a post Brexit Hartlepool.
Why would an anti-racist party allow Chris Williamson to sit on its benches in the Commons or allow Jim Sheridan to remain a member?
Being a native speaker of "proper" English also carries prestige and weight.
As for “resistance from the death cult” you’ve just had @FrancisUrquhart expressing scepticism on the magnitude of the change
'The kind of rhetoric the Tories and their supporters put out in the right wing press which leads to harassment, attempted murder and murder of Labour MPs and more recently some Tory MPs such as Anna Soubry as well.'
That doesn't say there are links between Tories and Britain first.
It does point out that much of their rhetoric and that of their supporters such as the RW press leads to this.
TBH people can get away with lies about Corbyn and Labour then I am on very safe ground making accurate statements about the rhetoric of the right wing press.
The irony is the total inability of the EU to understand the very different emotions it can itself provoke in the UK just by being emotional itself.
The single market I am less sure on but Labour may fudge that somewhat. Although this second point is probably unavailable as I don't think Labour will actually get the chance to negotiate.
The poll of more than 2,000 people was carried out by Opinion Matters for the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust (HMDT).
If you are saying that wanting to be outside FoM means no deal can be done that that is a lack of flexibility on the EUs part. I u serstabdcthey want FoM because it is hugely beneficial for them but that’s not the same as it being essential