However, it will be progress, of a sort, if all the amendments fail. Maybe, just maybe, we can count on MPs to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities.
If all the amendments fail, the chances of a fresh referendum must rise sharply. If Parliament is incapable of making the decision, the public will have to be asked again.
Atilla Yesilada, Turkey analyst for GlobalSource Partners, an emerging markets analysis firm, said Burj al Babas’s fate was a snapshot of the wider malaise plaguing the Turkish construction sector. “It’s not just the homebuilders who go bankrupt. The people who supply goods to those industries – the architects, the technicians, the glass and steel makers – those people suffer too,” he said.
What is objectionable is people living abroad like Sandpit (and Archer before him) advocating pain for the country and talking about the consequences in first person plural tense when they are safely set up thousands of miles away.
Jeesh. This is very very unfair on @Sandpit, he wishes to return to blighty but due to the immigration rules he is unable to with his family ! This doesn't render his arguments moot.
For the last time, he is entitled to put his arguments. What he is not entitled to do is pretend that he is in the same boat.
He never did.
I would use “We” as well when referring to the British population as a whole. But I suspect I’d have more options than most. That fact doesn’t invalidate my opinions
However, it will be progress, of a sort, if all the amendments fail. Maybe, just maybe, we can count on MPs to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities.
If all the amendments fail, the chances of a fresh referendum must rise sharply. If Parliament is incapable of making the decision, the public will have to be asked again.
I think Cooper-Boles, Grieve and Spelman will pass if selected.
However, it will be progress, of a sort, if all the amendments fail. Maybe, just maybe, we can count on MPs to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities.
If all the amendments fail, the chances of a fresh referendum must rise sharply. If Parliament is incapable of making the decision, the public will have to be asked again.
I think Cooper-Boles, Grieve and Spelman will pass if selected.
I think that's right. I was following Richard's hypothesis up.
However, it will be progress, of a sort, if all the amendments fail. Maybe, just maybe, we can count on MPs to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all other possibilities.
If all the amendments fail, the chances of a fresh referendum must rise sharply. If Parliament is incapable of making the decision, the public will have to be asked again.
Only if there's Commons backing for a referendum, and realistically government support as well. It's far from obvious that there is the first, and there certainly isn't the second at the moment.
Peter Capaldi in the first series of "The Thick Of It" in 2005 was 47. In his last series of Doctor Who in 2017 was 58. His aging is dramatic.
Men start to 'go over' at about 52. Certainly at 58 they are gone. They can still carry on if they really want to and many do - being CEOs, being Dr Who, staying in the cabinet, presenting documentaries on TV, running for president - but IMO it is all a bit uncalled for.
To be honest, on a site about betting, I'd expect something a bit less blunt than "I don't think there will be a problem". Something more along the lines of looking at probabilities and consequences.
Okay, numbers.
ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is produced in the UK. 30% is imported from the EU and 20% imported from the RoW. 10% of the value of UK food consumption is exported.
So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.
That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.
If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.
Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.
If everyone ate 80% of what they do now, we'd be a fitter and healthier nation, not starving and rioting.
The problems will come from people panicking rather than trusting the supply chains to sort themselves out.
Of course if half the EU food arrived, then we'd be on 95% even before the supermarkets go shopping in the rest of the world.
There's plenty of risks associated with Brexit, but food shortages really isn't one of them. Maybe it might seem like the end of the world for Tarquin in Hoxton that he can't get avocados for a week or two, but it really isn't.
Off you go again with your fake "we's". I doubt food supply in Dubai will be significantly affected, other than perhaps that the Marmite and HP Sauce might not be getting through.
Why should geographic location determine whether you are a member of a community or not?
Citizens of Nowhere Tessy seems to think it has some bearing.
She was talking about tax dodgers
Somewhere = a place Nowhere = not a place
Precisely. She was talking about globe trotters who organise their tax affairs to minimise the contribution that they make to anywhere. Hence “citizens of nowhere” rather than people who put something back into the community to which they belong
ONS 2017 - 50% of food consumed in the UK is produced in the UK. 30% is imported from the EU and 20% imported from the RoW. 10% of the value of UK food consumption is exported.
So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.
That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.
If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.
Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.
If everyone ate 80% of what they do now, we'd be a fitter and healthier nation, not starving and rioting.
The problems will come from people panicking rather than trusting the supply chains to sort themselves out.
Of course if half the EU food arrived, then we'd be on 95% even before the supermarkets go shopping in the rest of the world.
There's plenty of risks associated with Brexit, but food shortages really isn't one of them. Maybe it might seem like the end of the world for Tarquin in Hoxton that he can't get avocados for a week or two, but it really isn't.
Off you go again with your fake "we's". I doubt food supply in Dubai will be significantly affected, other than perhaps that the Marmite and HP Sauce might not be getting through.
Why should geographic location determine whether you are a member of a community or not?
Citizens of Nowhere Tessy seems to think it has some bearing.
She was talking about tax dodgers
And suggesting that if you voted Remain you were privileged and out of touch.
For the referendum was not just a vote to withdraw from the EU. It was about something broader – something that the European Union had come to represent.
It was about a sense – deep, profound and let’s face it often justified – that many people have today that the world works well for a privileged few, but not for them.
Eh? She’s talking about Leavers feeling left behind there.
And the flip side of that is what? That Remainers are all right, Jack.
Putting Venezuela’s crisis and US intervention in historical context
The far-right governments of Trump and Bolsonaro offer no hope to Venezuela or to the majority of people in Latin America (US puts ‘full weight’ behind regime change in Venezuela, 24 January).
Whatever views people hold on Venezuela, there is no justification for backing the US attempt at regime change under way, which, if successful, could go the way of the disastrous interventions in Iraq and Libya.
Instead, the way forward is the call for dialogue from the Mexican and Bolivian presidents.
Signed by many of the usual suspects, including Owen Jones, Ken Livingstone and top Corbynista MPs, Stop the War, etc.
Far-right? I wonder what term these people would use to describe Hitler's government?
"Any suggestion of Hitler being an antisemite is a smear orchestrated by centrists. Hitler has always been against all forms of racism, and indeed frequently supports underprivileged groups such as Aryans."
Cameron's Govt. he joined (2010 Coalition) didn't call the Referendum - that was after the 2015 election, where the LibDems got so mullered they couldn't even have enabled a minibus....
Cameron and Clegg’s government allowed cabinet ministers to say leaving the EU was a good idea without being disciplined. Hammond even got promoted for it.
Really?
"Coalition Agreement:
9. Relations with the EU We agree that the British government will be a positive participant in the European Union, playing a strong and positive role with our partners....."
Not much scope for Leaving there......
Those were the days; how sensible in retrospect things seem back then.
Peter Capaldi in the first series of "The Thick Of It" in 2005 was 47. In his last series of Doctor Who in 2017 was 58. His aging is dramatic.
Men start to 'go over' at about 52. Certainly at 58 they are gone. They can still carry on if they really want to and many do - being CEOs, being Dr Who, staying in the cabinet, presenting documentaries on TV, running for president - but IMO it is all a bit uncalled for.
About 52? That's me done for then.
Bl&^%y hell, I must be coming round for the second time then!
British firms are “praying for an extension to article 50” rather than face a no-deal Brexit as it emerged that foreign investment has fallen steeply and the outlook for growth has slumped to a six-year low.
The Confederation of British Industry said that firms’ reported growth prospects were at their weakest for almost six years, while other research shows the number of acquisitions of UK companies by foreign buyers is falling 11% year on year.
The warnings emerged after the British Chambers of Commerce said that thousands of the firms it represented had already triggered contingency plans for a no-deal Brexit, including plans to move operations out of the UK.
James Stewart, the head of Brexit at accountancy firm KPMG, said: “Many of the businesses we’re speaking to are praying for an extension to article 50”, hoping for a delay to the self-imposed 29 March deadline for Britain to leave the EU.
And this might equally have been headlined "Wall St realises it can't buy the next Democratic nominee": https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/28/wall-street-2020-economy-taxes-1118065 “I’m a socially liberal, fiscally conservative centrist who would love to vote for a rational Democrat and get Trump out of the White House,” said the CEO of one of the nation’s largest banks, who, like a dozen other executives interviewed for this story, declined to be identified by name for fear of angering a volatile president. “Personally, I’d love to see Bloomberg run and get the nomination. I’ve just never thought he could get the nomination the way the primary process works.”...
Peter Capaldi in the first series of "The Thick Of It" in 2005 was 47. In his last series of Doctor Who in 2017 was 58. His aging is dramatic.
Men start to 'go over' at about 52. Certainly at 58 they are gone. They can still carry on if they really want to and many do - being CEOs, being Dr Who, staying in the cabinet, presenting documentaries on TV, running for president - but IMO it is all a bit uncalled for.
I'm assuming you're just trying to wind up @SeanT ?
Atilla Yesilada, Turkey analyst for GlobalSource Partners, an emerging markets analysis firm, said Burj al Babas’s fate was a snapshot of the wider malaise plaguing the Turkish construction sector. “It’s not just the homebuilders who go bankrupt. The people who supply goods to those industries – the architects, the technicians, the glass and steel makers – those people suffer too,” he said.
*Gulp* !
But how can that be? Turkey is not in the EU but has an agreement a la May. Surely, according to the brexiteers this should be paradise
And this might equally have been headlined "Wall St realises it can't buy the next Democratic nominee": https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/28/wall-street-2020-economy-taxes-1118065 “I’m a socially liberal, fiscally conservative centrist who would love to vote for a rational Democrat and get Trump out of the White House,” said the CEO of one of the nation’s largest banks, who, like a dozen other executives interviewed for this story, declined to be identified by name for fear of angering a volatile president. “Personally, I’d love to see Bloomberg run and get the nomination. I’ve just never thought he could get the nomination the way the primary process works.”...
My favourite current Guardian story is this one, which treads a wonderfully bonkers tightrope in insinuating that parliamentarians who are directly or vaguely associated with farms receiving large EU subsidies therefore support, err, Brexit and will lose them:
British firms are “praying for an extension to article 50” rather than face a no-deal Brexit as it emerged that foreign investment has fallen steeply and the outlook for growth has slumped to a six-year low.
The Confederation of British Industry said that firms’ reported growth prospects were at their weakest for almost six years, while other research shows the number of acquisitions of UK companies by foreign buyers is falling 11% year on year.
The warnings emerged after the British Chambers of Commerce said that thousands of the firms it represented had already triggered contingency plans for a no-deal Brexit, including plans to move operations out of the UK.
James Stewart, the head of Brexit at accountancy firm KPMG, said: “Many of the businesses we’re speaking to are praying for an extension to article 50”, hoping for a delay to the self-imposed 29 March deadlinefor Britain to leave the EU.
Why would FDI increase with an extension of A50?
An extension does not introduce any clarity for business it just extends the uncertainty. Which is also what May's deal does as well. What business wants is to have a clear understanding of what the future holds for the relationship that the UK will have with the EU and the RoW as soon as possible.
If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.
It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.
It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.
Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
So name an alternative plan.
Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.
revoke , take the slap on the chops and get on with being a real member instead of a whinging cur. Tories don't have the guts for it though.
Atilla Yesilada, Turkey analyst for GlobalSource Partners, an emerging markets analysis firm, said Burj al Babas’s fate was a snapshot of the wider malaise plaguing the Turkish construction sector. “It’s not just the homebuilders who go bankrupt. The people who supply goods to those industries – the architects, the technicians, the glass and steel makers – those people suffer too,” he said.
*Gulp* !
But how can that be? Turkey is not in the EU but has an agreement a la May. Surely, according to the brexiteers this should be paradise
More Trump's/Erdogan's nonsense rather than their position vis a vis their EU relationship.
What is objectionable is people living abroad like Sandpit (and Archer before him) advocating pain for the country and talking about the consequences in first person plural tense when they are safely set up thousands of miles away.
Jeesh. This is very very unfair on @Sandpit, he wishes to return to blighty but due to the immigration rules he is unable to with his family ! This doesn't render his arguments moot.
For the last time, he is entitled to put his arguments. What he is not entitled to do is pretend that he is in the same boat.
He never did.
I would use “We” as well when referring to the British population as a whole. But I suspect I’d have more options than most. That fact doesn’t invalidate my opinions
Putting Venezuela’s crisis and US intervention in historical context
The far-right governments of Trump and Bolsonaro offer no hope to Venezuela or to the majority of people in Latin America (US puts ‘full weight’ behind regime change in Venezuela, 24 January).
Whatever views people hold on Venezuela, there is no justification for backing the US attempt at regime change under way, which, if successful, could go the way of the disastrous interventions in Iraq and Libya.
Instead, the way forward is the call for dialogue from the Mexican and Bolivian presidents.
British firms are “praying for an extension to article 50” rather than face a no-deal Brexit as it emerged that foreign investment has fallen steeply and the outlook for growth has slumped to a six-year low.
The Confederation of British Industry said that firms’ reported growth prospects were at their weakest for almost six years, while other research shows the number of acquisitions of UK companies by foreign buyers is falling 11% year on year.
The warnings emerged after the British Chambers of Commerce said that thousands of the firms it represented had already triggered contingency plans for a no-deal Brexit, including plans to move operations out of the UK.
James Stewart, the head of Brexit at accountancy firm KPMG, said: “Many of the businesses we’re speaking to are praying for an extension to article 50”, hoping for a delay to the self-imposed 29 March deadlinefor Britain to leave the EU.
Why would FDI increase with an extension of A50?
An extension does not introduce any clarity for business it just extends the uncertainty. Which is also what May's deal does as well. What business wants is to have a clear understanding of what the future holds for the relationship that the UK will have with the EU and the RoW as soon as possible.
The EU say we (*innocent face*) can’t do that until we leave.
If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.
It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.
It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.
Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
So name an alternative plan.
Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.
revoke , take the slap on the chops and get on with being a real member instead of a whinging cur. Tories don't have the guts for it though.
We don't want to be a real member. We had a referendum on it and everything....
If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.
It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.
It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.
Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
So name an alternative plan.
Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.
revoke , take the slap on the chops and get on with being a real member instead of a whinging cur. Tories don't have the guts for it though.
We don't want to be a real member. We had a referendum on it and everything....
We had a referendum on being a reluctant member. When we had a referendum on being a real member in 1975, 17.4 million people said Yes.
It is rather spooky how closely the BBC report echoes what I posted earlier: "Retailers have been reluctant to intervene in the Brexit debate but are doing so now as the UK's departure date from the EU approaches. Their letter says that stockpiling fresh food is impossible and that the complex, 'just in time' supply chain through which food is imported into the UK will be "significantly disrupted" in the event of a no-deal Brexit. It adds it is difficult to stockpile any more produce as "all frozen and chilled storage is already been used"." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47028748
Just let this sink in.
We are talking about food shortages as a direct result of government policy.
The Cooper-Boles amendment will pass, and the Gov't has said that it will be duty bound to seek an extension on Brexit. Now the EU shouldn't give us more time to fanny about, but they are keen to avoid a no deal Brexit; so they will. Why deal with now what you can kick down the road later. Once it's been kicked down the road once, it will be kicked down the road again and again till eventually some sort of deal or another referendum (Either possibly after a GE) is passed. For the moment it'll be Hotel California Brexit though.
That seems likely. With the ERG doing its best to sabotage Brexit, Remainers have very little reason to be worried.
If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.
It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.
It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.
Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
So name an alternative plan.
Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.
revoke , take the slap on the chops and get on with being a real member instead of a whinging cur. Tories don't have the guts for it though.
We don't want to be a real member. We had a referendum on it and everything....
We had a referendum on being a reluctant member. When we had a referendum on being a real member in 1975, 17.4 million people said Yes.
The purpose of the meeting was to set the course for the development of the enlarged Community. We thought it right to establish the broad principles on which this development should be based. In each field of activity we considered, the Community showed that it could agree not just on broad principles but also upon practical decisions and a programme of work for the institutions of the Community, to nut the principles into effect.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
So, if trade in food with the EU stops completely, and we stop exporting, we can cover 80% of current domestic demand without any other changes.
That's not going to lead to general shortages, as opposed to on specific lines - unless people start panicking.
If we can only cover 80% of consumption, there will be rioting, looting and widespread malnutrition.
Now, I don't think it will come to that (it's just not going to happen), but your answer shows a complete lack of understanding of how quickly food gets turned over in a supermarket.
If everyone ate 80% of what they do now, we'd be a fitter and healthier nation, not starving and rioting.
The problems will come from people panicking rather than trusting the supply chains to sort themselves out.
Of course if half the EU food arrived, then we'd be on 95% even before the supermarkets go shopping in the rest of the world.
There's plenty of risks associated with Brexit, but food shortages really isn't one of them. Maybe it might seem like the end of the world for Tarquin in Hoxton that he can't get avocados for a week or two, but it really isn't.
Off you go again with your fake "we's". I doubt food supply in Dubai will be significantly affected, other than perhaps that the Marmite and HP Sauce might not be getting through.
Why should geographic location determine whether you are a member of a community or not?
Citizens of Nowhere Tessy seems to think it has some bearing.
She was talking about tax dodgers
And suggesting that if you voted Remain you were privileged and out of touch.
For the referendum was not just a vote to withdraw from the EU. It was about something broader – something that the European Union had come to represent.
It was about a sense – deep, profound and let’s face it often justified – that many people have today that the world works well for a privileged few, but not for them.
Eh? She’s talking about Leavers feeling left behind there.
And the flip side of that is what? That Remainers are all right, Jack.
Nope. That the world “works well for a privileged few”. With May WYSIWYG
That seems likely. With the ERG doing its best to sabotage Brexit, Remainers have very little reason to be worried.
Au contraire... given all the additional enabling bills needed to do anything no matter which option is picked, it looks increasingly like there will be an almighty cockup since we are running out of time of pass ANY bills. Even if we revoke A50, we need to undo our domestic changes and we lack time for that.
Maybe we will not "No Deal" but it looks like we will "Screw up"
The purpose of the meeting was to set the course for the development of the enlarged Community. We thought it right to establish the broad principles on which this development should be based. In each field of activity we considered, the Community showed that it could agree not just on broad principles but also upon practical decisions and a programme of work for the institutions of the Community, to nut the principles into effect.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
The purpose of the meeting was to set the course for the development of the enlarged Community. We thought it right to establish the broad principles on which this development should be based. In each field of activity we considered, the Community showed that it could agree not just on broad principles but also upon practical decisions and a programme of work for the institutions of the Community, to nut the principles into effect.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
No mention of political union...
If you read the rest of it he talks about a common foreign policy.
That seems likely. With the ERG doing its best to sabotage Brexit, Remainers have very little reason to be worried.
Au contraire... given all the additional enabling bills needed to do anything no matter which option is picked, it looks increasingly like there will be an almighty cockup since we are running out of time of pass ANY bills. Even if we revoke A50, we need to undo our domestic changes and we lack time for that.
Maybe we will not "No Deal" but it looks like we will "Screw up"
A lot depends whether the EU will play ball. If they're willing to extend the A50 deadline so that our MPs can faff around, well, they'll faff around indefinitely.
If they say No, then MPs have to take a decision, fast.
If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.
It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.
Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
So name an alternative plan.
Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.
revoke , take the slap on the chops and get on with being a real member instead of a whinging cur. Tories don't have the guts for it though.
We don't want to be a real member. We had a referendum on it and everything....
We had a referendum on being a reluctant member. When we had a referendum on being a real member in 1975, 17.4 million people said Yes.
Seeing as I wasn't even born, yet alone old enough to vote, a reconisder after 40 years doesn't seem too unreasonable.
Certainly more reasonable than a re-consider before this one is even implemented.
The Cooper-Boles amendment will pass, and the Gov't has said that it will be duty bound to seek an extension on Brexit. Now the EU shouldn't give us more time to fanny about, but they are keen to avoid a no deal Brexit; so they will. Why deal with now what you can kick down the road later. Once it's been kicked down the road once, it will be kicked down the road again and again till eventually some sort of deal or another referendum (Either possibly after a GE) is passed. For the moment it'll be Hotel California Brexit though.
I suppose it depends whether the EU is bluffing about not extending the deadline except for an agreed plan.
Regardless of what people say about the EU wanting to maintain unity and the requirement for unanimity not making much difference, I think it clearly does mean greater weight will be given to minority views.
I'm assuming you're just trying to wind up @SeanT ?
I have no intention of 'going' anywhere.
Nothing wrong with that attitude. Each can take their own approach to the challenge of 'going over'. Personally, I see much merit in bull by horns and getting it over and done with quickly. So one day you just take an audit, external and internal, and embrace that you are now on the other side. You are no longer going over. You are gone. After this there is no looking back, no more pain and confusion, and the sky's the limit.
It shames me to recall that I once worked for a company that was effectively insolvent. We managed to sell it at a scandalously high price to a cash rich water company. The due diligence was perfectly thorough, orthodox and intense. But none of the visiting accountants and consultants thought to ask basic common sense questions. Had they asked, for example, when we last paid the milkman the answer would have been '12 months ago' because we never paid anybody we didn't have to. We had no cash. To us, it was obvious the company was broke, but it didn't become obvious to the buyer until a few days after the sale was completed.
I always read the bank statements. Cashflow is king. Always.
Plus you need to find the unpaid invoices stuffed in a drawer somewhere.
The Cooper-Boles amendment will pass, and the Gov't has said that it will be duty bound to seek an extension on Brexit. Now the EU shouldn't give us more time to fanny about, but they are keen to avoid a no deal Brexit; so they will. Why deal with now what you can kick down the road later. Once it's been kicked down the road once, it will be kicked down the road again and again till eventually some sort of deal or another referendum (Either possibly after a GE) is passed. For the moment it'll be Hotel California Brexit though.
I suppose it depends whether the EU is bluffing about not extending the deadline except for an agreed plan.
Regardless of what people say about the EU wanting to maintain unity and the requirement for unanimity not making much difference, I think it clearly does mean greater weight will be given to minority views.
There is little or no downside for the EU to extend for short while until the EU elections. After that it becomes more problematical. They would prefer us not to crash out on March 29th without a deal, so giving us a short extension which has no downside for them is a bit of a no-brainer.
Comments
*Gulp* !
I would use “We” as well when referring to the British population as a whole. But I suspect I’d have more options than most. That fact doesn’t invalidate my opinions
Everybody else can fuck off (as far as she is concerned)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/28/uk-corporation-tax-cut-to-cost-billions-more-than-thought
The Confederation of British Industry said that firms’ reported growth prospects were at their weakest for almost six years, while other research shows the number of acquisitions of UK companies by foreign buyers is falling 11% year on year.
The warnings emerged after the British Chambers of Commerce said that thousands of the firms it represented had already triggered contingency plans for a no-deal Brexit, including plans to move operations out of the UK.
James Stewart, the head of Brexit at accountancy firm KPMG, said: “Many of the businesses we’re speaking to are praying for an extension to article 50”, hoping for a delay to the self-imposed 29 March deadline for Britain to leave the EU.
And this might equally have been headlined "Wall St realises it can't buy the next Democratic nominee":
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/28/wall-street-2020-economy-taxes-1118065
“I’m a socially liberal, fiscally conservative centrist who would love to vote for a rational Democrat and get Trump out of the White House,” said the CEO of one of the nation’s largest banks, who, like a dozen other executives interviewed for this story, declined to be identified by name for fear of angering a volatile president. “Personally, I’d love to see Bloomberg run and get the nomination. I’ve just never thought he could get the nomination the way the primary process works.”...
I have no intention of 'going' anywhere.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/27/revealed-the-mps-and-peers-receiving-millions-in-eu-farm-subsidies-cap
An extension does not introduce any clarity for business it just extends the uncertainty. Which is also what May's deal does as well. What business wants is to have a clear understanding of what the future holds for the relationship that the UK will have with the EU and the RoW as soon as possible.
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1972/oct/23/european-communities-summit-conference-1
The purpose of the meeting was to set the course for the development of the enlarged Community. We thought it right to establish the broad principles on which this development should be based. In each field of activity we considered, the Community showed that it could agree not just on broad principles but also upon practical decisions and a programme of work for the institutions of the Community, to nut the principles into effect.
The main decision of the summit conference was that the member States of the Community affirmed their intention to transform the whole complex of their relations into a European Union by the end of the decade. The institutions of the Community are to report on the subject by the end of 1975. The enlarged Community reaffirmed its determination to progress towards economic and monetary union; and it was fully accepted that progress in economic co-operation must move in parallel with progress in monetary co-operation.
Maybe we will not "No Deal" but it looks like we will "Screw up"
If they say No, then MPs have to take a decision, fast.
When do we learn which amendments His Ever So Humbleness has selected?
Certainly more reasonable than a re-consider before this one is even implemented.
Regardless of what people say about the EU wanting to maintain unity and the requirement for unanimity not making much difference, I think it clearly does mean greater weight will be given to minority views.
Mars bar eating surrender monkeys.