Probably my biggest issue with George Osborne is his arrogance. He thinks he's much cleverer than everyone else, that no-one will notice what he's really up to and, if they do, they can be manipulated accordingly to fall in with his real agenda. If not, he's remarkably vindictive.
He's a messy bitch and shit-stirrer. Also, he dislikes Theresa May and has a handy organ with which to repeatedly slap her.
I'm glad you're back, Grabby. I didn't think it'd take long.
Totally O\t but extraordinary statement in the Guardian; the former auditor of the collapsed cake chain Patisserie Valerie has argued that it is not the role of accountants to uncover fraud.
Surely it's their duty to establish that the accounts are a true and correct record etc.
He is correct, but it is their job to audit the accounts and that includes checking the bank balances are as stated at year end. If it was a fake supplier/invoice type fraud then no, that possibly wouldn't be picked up by auditors as the accounts form a true and fair view at year end; but this isn't that. Myself and Nabavi have gone into this here in previous posts... it looks on the facts as available that the auditors are on a very sticky wicket.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Farage was always an English nationalist. Even in his trader days he was known for it. Used to make new team members sing Jerusalem, if my information is correct.
Jerusalem was our school song - before we joined the EEC.
Jerusalem is still our school song.
Jerusalem is a fine socialist anthem.
William Blake as the patron saint of UKIP is certainly a funny thought.
The NAZI party as owner of futhorcs is a sad one. But once appropriated from the original meaning or an authors intent, things cannot be reclaimed.
Thank you Mr Dots, you made me look up futhorc.
In our pre Brexit ranting days I would nearly always learn something new from the PB collective
Once we are out with no deal there is no backstop. We either have an implemented hard border or not.
There may be direct discussions about finding ways to create a soft border again but it won’t be the current proposal - that makes no sense post an exit
When we move to No Deal the Irish border will remain just as it is now. That will help the Irish, but it won't help us.
You mean the EU have been lying throughout the negotiations?
If this is the case why die in a ditch for the backstop
The backstop is necessary to the WA because without one there could be regulatory divergence between the Republic and NI which runs contrary to the GFA.
Do you have a reference for that assertion, because I've read the text of the Belfast Agreement a few times and I've not seen any commitment to avoid regulatory divergence?
It would be helpful if people didn't keep adding imaginary clauses to the GFA.
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
EEA: putting the power back where we can see it http://peterjnorth.blogspot.com/2017/08/eea-putting-power-back-where-we-can-see.html That is where the EEA option is the superior model. It really is about "taking back control". When the EU brings a new piece of legislation into being (likely adopted global standards), it is not automatically adopted by Norway. There is a constitutional process whereby the Norwegian parliament debates and decides whether or not to adopt a measure. We know that there is a penalty if they do not adhere to single market rules, but ultimately it is their decision to consider the balance of trade-offs according to their own strategic trade goals and domestic values.
Totally O\t but extraordinary statement in the Guardian; the former auditor of the collapsed cake chain Patisserie Valerie has argued that it is not the role of accountants to uncover fraud.
Surely it's their duty to establish that the accounts are a true and correct record etc.
Technically correct. Only an accountant acting as an auditor has a statutory duty to report accounting irregularities to appropriate authorities, not all accountants.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Farage was always an English nationalist. Even in his trader days he was known for it. Used to make new team members sing Jerusalem, if my information is correct.
Jerusalem was our school song - before we joined the EEC.
There was probably also caning, spam fritters and casual racism. So what?
Jerusalem is not an anti EU song.
Jerusalem certainly no longer belongs to the writer of the words. His meaning is gone. That’s how the world works.
Just reads like Blake had been hitting the tincture of laudnum a bit too hard the day he wrote it. Which is probably true.
There’s bits of poetry in there, secrets only known the author, quite a bit of sex. Scholars reckon the mill was a fire wreck he regularly passed to and from the shops and that Blake excited by verbal histories in England and the med of Jesus visiting during the 15 years there’s little known of him except he worked for Uncle Jo. Jesus was Yeshua in those days.
Juncker wanted a permanent customs union in exchange for extending the Article 50 period, but Juncker thinks the current negotiated deal is the only one possible.
Totally O\t but extraordinary statement in the Guardian; the former auditor of the collapsed cake chain Patisserie Valerie has argued that it is not the role of accountants to uncover fraud.
Surely it's their duty to establish that the accounts are a true and correct record etc.
If people are hiding bank accounts, they ask the relevant banks the usual questions and nothing is disclosed, how are they meant to find it. They can make management enquiries but if the management lies to them, how are they meant to discover fraud? I know one company where the FD ran two sets of books, ones displayed to auditors and ones which were perhaps more honest. Yes, it came out later with a liquidity crunch but before then how do you suggest they discover wilful fraud?
I don’t think auditors help themselves with attempts to limit negligence payments to the amounts of fees they receive for a given piece of work but I sort of understand why.
Altmaier said he was deeply worried that a British exit from the EU at the end of March would lead to "considerable economic policy distortions." Berlin must do everything in the coming days to help avoid an unregulated Brexit, he added.
Unless they are setting up to blame No Deal Brexit Britain for all of the EU's upcoming woes - woes that were going to happen to the EU anyway. Saves them having to take responsibity with their voters....
Forecasting unemployment down and wage growth of 4.8%. Tax cuts planned. Doesn't sound too gloomy.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Not sure that's true; the number of people in this country who get exercised about things like gay marriage is very small.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Farage was always an English nationalist. Even in his trader days he was known for it. Used to make new team members sing Jerusalem, if my information is correct.
Jerusalem was our school song - before we joined the EEC.
Jerusalem is still our school song.
Jerusalem is a fine socialist anthem.
William Blake as the patron saint of UKIP is certainly a funny thought.
The NAZI party as owner of futhorcs is a sad one. But once appropriated from the original meaning or an authors intent, things cannot be reclaimed.
Thank you Mr Dots, you made me look up futhorc.
In our pre Brexit ranting days I would nearly always learn something new from the PB collective
sadly thats gone by the wayside of late
Did the investigation take you to the origins of the German NAZI party as a group for enjoying and extolling runes for their shared links into history? It’s the same runes used more innocently by Tolkien. In fact even the word Orc maybe...
Juncker wanted a permanent customs union in exchange for extending the Article 50 period, but Juncker thinks the current negotiated deal is the only one possible.
The only deal possible given May's increasingly incomprehensible red lines.
If May walked back her red lines on FoM and ECJ jurisdiction they could bang out a Norway+ compromise in a few days I reckon.
Altmaier said he was deeply worried that a British exit from the EU at the end of March would lead to "considerable economic policy distortions." Berlin must do everything in the coming days to help avoid an unregulated Brexit, he added.
Considering the troubles of British High Streets are in even with increasing retail sales those in France must be in a shocking state:
' In December 2018, household expenditure on goods fell by 1.5% in volume, after decreasing slightly in November (−0.1%). This downturn was mainly due to a sharp drop in energy consumption (−4.3%) and purchases of manufactured goods (−1.9%). Over the whole fourth quarter, consumer spending on goods fell sharply (−0.7% after +0.3% in the third quarter), due to the decline in durable manufactured goods consumption.
Once we are out with no deal there is no backstop. We either have an implemented hard border or not.
There may be direct discussions about finding ways to create a soft border again but it won’t be the current proposal - that makes no sense post an exit
When we move to No Deal the Irish border will remain just as it is now. That will help the Irish, but it won't help us.
You mean the EU have been lying throughout the negotiations?
If this is the case why die in a ditch for the backstop
The backstop is necessary to the WA because without one there could be regulatory divergence between the Republic and NI which runs contrary to the GFA.
Do you have a reference for that assertion, because I've read the text of the Belfast Agreement a few times and I've not seen any commitment to avoid regulatory divergence?
It would be helpful if people didn't keep adding imaginary clauses to the GFA.
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Metrication has been official UK policy since before we joined the EEC. Appeasing the metric martyrs was probably the first sign we'd end up with this nostalgia cult.
Wasting your time, Philip Thompson has gone into full Trumpton "Fake News" mode.
I asked for a quote from DURING the referendum and to give a DATE. Instead an undated video gets given.
But if you check the video it was uploaded 14 May 2015. Unless Dan Hannan has a Tardis can you explain to me how that video was filmed during the referendum and yet was posted a year before it? The referendum campaign began and ended in 2016 yet Hannan managed to upload a video you're claiming was filmed during the referendum a year earlier than it.
And you have the temerity to use the claim fake news? Have you no shame?
Wasting your time, Philip Thompson has gone into full Trumpton "Fake News" mode.
I asked for a quote from DURING the referendum and to give a DATE. Instead an undated video gets given.
But if you check the video it was uploaded 14 May 2015. Unless Dan Hannan has a Tardis can you explain to me how that video was filmed during the referendum and yet was posted a year before it? The referendum campaign began and ended in 2016 yet Hannan managed to upload a video you're claiming was filmed during the referendum a year earlier than it.
And you have the temerity to use the claim fake news? Have you no shame?
I gave you one of Rees-Mogg and you've studiously ignored it.
Once we are out with no deal there is no backstop. We either have an implemented hard border or not.
There may be direct discussions about finding ways to create a soft border again but it won’t be the current proposal - that makes no sense post an exit
When we move to No Deal the Irish border will remain just as it is now. That will help the Irish, but it won't help us.
You mean the EU have been lying throughout the negotiations?
If this is the case why die in a ditch for the backstop
The backstop is necessary to the WA because without one there could be regulatory divergence between the Republic and NI which runs contrary to the GFA.
Do you have a reference for that assertion, because I've read the text of the Belfast Agreement a few times and I've not seen any commitment to avoid regulatory divergence?
It would be helpful if people didn't keep adding imaginary clauses to the GFA.
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Metrication has been official UK policy since before we joined the EEC. Appeasing the metric martyrs was probably the first sign we'd end up with this nostalgia cult.
So you didn't complain when the government of the Republic decided to regulatory diverge from Northern Ireland.
He did say a renegotiation could take place based on a permanent Customs Union at the weekend though but that would require the UK to make the concession not the EU by removing the backstop
Juncker wanted a permanent customs union in exchange for extending the Article 50 period, but Juncker thinks the current negotiated deal is the only one possible.
The only deal possible given May's increasingly incomprehensible red lines.
If May walked back her red lines on FoM and ECJ jurisdiction they could bang out a Norway+ compromise in a few days I reckon.
May's red lines are pretty clear, the problem is she's bent the deal to accommodate all of them rather than giving some of them up.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Not sure that's true; the number of people in this country who get exercised about things like gay marriage is very small.
I've never heard anyone mention it.
But its possible that it was a big talking point in DH's Conservative circles.
Once we are out with no deal there is no backstop. We either have an implemented hard border or not.
There may be direct discussions about finding ways to create a soft border again but it won’t be the current proposal - that makes no sense post an exit
When we move to No Deal the Irish border will remain just as it is now. That will help the Irish, but it won't help us.
You mean the EU have been lying throughout the negotiations?
If this is the case why die in a ditch for the backstop
The backstop is necessary to the WA because without one there could be regulatory divergence between the Republic and NI which runs contrary to the GFA.
Do you have a reference for that assertion, because I've read the text of the Belfast Agreement a few times and I've not seen any commitment to avoid regulatory divergence?
It would be helpful if people didn't keep adding imaginary clauses to the GFA.
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Metrication has been official UK policy since before we joined the EEC. Appeasing the metric martyrs was probably the first sign we'd end up with this nostalgia cult.
So you didn't complain when the government of the Republic decided to regulatory diverge from Northern Ireland.
How does it impact cross-border trade, given that all vehicles in the UK have to have km/h speedometers anyway?
Totally O\t but extraordinary statement in the Guardian; the former auditor of the collapsed cake chain Patisserie Valerie has argued that it is not the role of accountants to uncover fraud.
Surely it's their duty to establish that the accounts are a true and correct record etc.
He is correct, but it is their job to audit the accounts and that includes checking the bank balances are as stated at year end. If it was a fake supplier/invoice type fraud then no, that possibly wouldn't be picked up by auditors as the accounts form a true and fair view at year end; but this isn't that. Myself and Nabavi have gone into this here in previous posts... it looks on the facts as available that the auditors are on a very sticky wicket.
Anyone looking at the Trip Advisor ratings for Patisserie Valerie should have hear alarm bells.
Mr. Divvie, another deal would be possible if the EU ditched their red lines too...
I guess if we confuse the EU enough they might start making concessions by mistake?
Maybe, but they're not idiots, which means their insistence they are confused (in the sense they don't know what we want) is false. Whatever the reasonableness of their position they are also talking a lot of bollocks.
He did say a renegotiation could take place based on a permanent Customs Union at the weekend though but that would require the UK to make the concession not the EU by removing the backstop
All the negotiators are potentially straw-men in this.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Farage was always an English nationalist. Even in his trader days he was known for it. Used to make new team members sing Jerusalem, if my information is correct.
Jerusalem was our school song - before we joined the EEC.
There was probably also caning, spam fritters and casual racism. So what?
Jerusalem is not an anti EU song.
Jerusalem certainly no longer belongs to the writer of the words. His meaning is gone. That’s how the world works.
Just reads like Blake had been hitting the tincture of laudnum a bit too hard the day he wrote it. Which is probably true.
There’s bits of poetry in there, secrets only known the author, quite a bit of sex. Scholars reckon the mill was a fire wreck he regularly passed to and from the shops and that Blake excited by verbal histories in England and the med of Jesus visiting during the 15 years there’s little known of him except he worked for Uncle Jo. Jesus was Yeshua in those days.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Not sure that's true; the number of people in this country who get exercised about things like gay marriage is very small.
I've never heard anyone mention it.
But its possible that it was a big talking point in DH's Conservative circles.
I think the far right realised which way the wind was blowing and gave up on gays as a bad job, and moved on to trans folk and muslims as a riper target for their hatred.
Once we are out with no deal there is no backstop. We either have an implemented hard border or not.
There may be direct discussions about finding ways to create a soft border again but it won’t be the current proposal - that makes no sense post an exit
When we move to No Deal the Irish border will remain just as it is now. That will help the Irish, but it won't help us.
You mean the EU have been lying throughout the negotiations?
If this is the case why die in a ditch for the backstop
The backstop is necessary to the WA because without one there could be regulatory divergence between the Republic and NI which runs contrary to the GFA.
Do you have a reference for that assertion, because I've read the text of the Belfast Agreement a few times and I've not seen any commitment to avoid regulatory divergence?
It would be helpful if people didn't keep adding imaginary clauses to the GFA.
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Metrication has been official UK policy since before we joined the EEC. Appeasing the metric martyrs was probably the first sign we'd end up with this nostalgia cult.
So you didn't complain when the government of the Republic decided to regulatory diverge from Northern Ireland.
How does it impact cross-border trade, given that all vehicles in the UK have to have km/h speedometers anyway?
Its a regulatory divergence within Ireland.
And according to wiki cars in the Republic now having kmph only speedometers so clearly an impact on cross-border trade (and travel).
Mr. Divvie, another deal would be possible if the EU ditched their red lines too...
I guess if we confuse the EU enough they might start making concessions by mistake?
Maybe, but they're not idiots, which means their insistence they are confused (in the sense they don't know what we want) is false. Whatever the reasonableness of their position they are also talking a lot of bollocks.
The EU are well aware what the UK wants, always has been. Cake and Unicorns. The EU's dilemma is how to make the Brexit Buccaneers understand that sometimes they can't get what we want without them crashing the EU economy.
Juncker wanted a permanent customs union in exchange for extending the Article 50 period, but Juncker thinks the current negotiated deal is the only one possible.
It would be more honest if they were clear that they would accept other things, but not in the direction we want, rather than pretend, as they have done, that only one thing is possible and it is reneging on that to say otherwise.
Mr. Divvie, another deal would be possible if the EU ditched their red lines too...
I guess if we confuse the EU enough they might start making concessions by mistake?
Maybe, but they're not idiots, which means their insistence they are confused (in the sense they don't know what we want) is false. Whatever the reasonableness of their position they are also talking a lot of bollocks.
The EU are well aware what the UK wants, always has been. Cake and Unicorns. The EU's dilemma is how to make the Brexit Buccaneers understand that sometimes they can't get what we want without them crashing the EU economy.
That's not a dilemma, they are doing the right thing in that instance in being very clear in saying no, but they can do that without pretending they don't know what is going on. Who is that lie for? It's petty and pathetic. Our position is ridiculousness enough without making stuff up about it.
Mr. Divvie, another deal would be possible if the EU ditched their red lines too...
I guess if we confuse the EU enough they might start making concessions by mistake?
Maybe, but they're not idiots, which means their insistence they are confused (in the sense they don't know what we want) is false. Whatever the reasonableness of their position they are also talking a lot of bollocks.
The EU are well aware what the UK wants, always has been. Cake and Unicorns. The EU's dilemma is how to make the Brexit Buccaneers understand that sometimes they can't get what we want without them crashing the EU economy.
That's not a dilemma, they are doing the right thing in that instance in being very clear in saying no, but they can do that without pretending they don't know what is going on. Who is that lie for?
I think the angle that the EU is going for is exasperated parent.
"We've been over this before. We've told you why you can't get a baby unicorn as a pet. Why not ask for something reasonable like a puppy instead?"
Once we are out with no deal there is no backstop. We either have an implemented hard border or not.
There may be direct discussions about finding ways to create a soft border again but it won’t be the current proposal - that makes no sense post an exit
When we move to No Deal the Irish border will remain just as it is now. That will help the Irish, but it won't help us.
You mean the EU have been lying throughout the negotiations?
If this is the case why die in a ditch for the backstop
The backstop is necessary to the WA because without one there could be regulatory divergence between the Republic and NI which runs contrary to the GFA.
Do you have a reference for that assertion, because I've read the text of the Belfast Agreement a few times and I've not seen any commitment to avoid regulatory divergence?
It would be helpful if people didn't keep adding imaginary clauses to the GFA.
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Metrication has been official UK policy since before we joined the EEC. Appeasing the metric martyrs was probably the first sign we'd end up with this nostalgia cult.
So you didn't complain when the government of the Republic decided to regulatory diverge from Northern Ireland.
How does it impact cross-border trade, given that all vehicles in the UK have to have km/h speedometers anyway?
Its a regulatory divergence within Ireland.
And according to wiki cars in the Republic now having kmph only speedometers so clearly an impact on cross-border trade (and travel).
It's time we implemented our own policy then. A post-revocation government should prioritise changing all the road signs to kilometers as well as displaying EU flags on public buildings.
It's time we implemented our own policy then. A post-revocation government should prioritise changing all the road signs to kilometers as well as displaying EU flags on public buildings.
Mandatory riverdance lessons and free guinness for the under fives.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Not sure that's true; the number of people in this country who get exercised about things like gay marriage is very small.
I've never heard anyone mention it.
But its possible that it was a big talking point in DH's Conservative circles.
I think the far right realised which way the wind was blowing and gave up on gays as a bad job, and moved on to trans folk and muslims as a riper target for their hatred.
They should move on from Muslims as well. Prejudice against Muslims is a bad look for anyone affecting outrage over antisemitism.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Not sure that's true; the number of people in this country who get exercised about things like gay marriage is very small.
I've never heard anyone mention it.
But its possible that it was a big talking point in DH's Conservative circles.
In all my door-knocking, I only ever heard one disgruntled voice in Leave-voting, UKIP-leaning gammon-heaven Torbay. And she wasn't changing her vote because of it.
Mr. Divvie, another deal would be possible if the EU ditched their red lines too...
I guess if we confuse the EU enough they might start making concessions by mistake?
Maybe, but they're not idiots, which means their insistence they are confused (in the sense they don't know what we want) is false. Whatever the reasonableness of their position they are also talking a lot of bollocks.
The EU are well aware what the UK wants, always has been. Cake and Unicorns. The EU's dilemma is how to make the Brexit Buccaneers understand that sometimes they can't get what we want without them crashing the EU economy.
That's not a dilemma, they are doing the right thing in that instance in being very clear in saying no, but they can do that without pretending they don't know what is going on. Who is that lie for?
I think the angle that the EU is going for is exasperated parent.
"We've been over this before. We've told you why you can't get a baby unicorn as a pet. Why not ask for something reasonable like a puppy instead?"
What I would love to see is TMay sending over Boris, JRM and a Bridgen type to engage in 5 days of detailed explanation of what they want instead of the backstop with the proviso that the negotiations must be televised live.
I'd love to see their arguments comprehensively and systematically taken apart, day after day, session after session, almost more than I'd love to see Australia whitewashed or Liverpool's season implode.
Mr. Divvie, another deal would be possible if the EU ditched their red lines too...
I guess if we confuse the EU enough they might start making concessions by mistake?
Maybe, but they're not idiots, which means their insistence they are confused (in the sense they don't know what we want) is false. Whatever the reasonableness of their position they are also talking a lot of bollocks.
Not sure how to say this politely, but you seem to have a singular talent for focusing on the least important aspect of whatever anyone says.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Not sure that's true; the number of people in this country who get exercised about things like gay marriage is very small.
I've never heard anyone mention it.
But its possible that it was a big talking point in DH's Conservative circles.
In all my door-knocking, I only ever heard one disgruntled voice in Leave-voting, UKIP-leaning gammon-heaven Torbay. And she wasn't changing her vote because of it.
We had a voter in Sussex, who had always voted Conservative, ring up and say he was switching his vote because of Cameron's support for gay marriage. That in itself wasn't a big surprise, but the fact that he was switching to the Greens did raise an eyebrow.
Strange to think the decision to sell dodgy mortgages to people who couldn't afford them has probably resulted in the UK leaving the EU 10 years later. Who could have predicted that chain of events?
It was probably more gay marriage. That was what spiked UKIP's vote share in the early part of this decade.
Not sure that's true; the number of people in this country who get exercised about things like gay marriage is very small.
I've never heard anyone mention it.
But its possible that it was a big talking point in DH's Conservative circles.
In all my door-knocking, I only ever heard one disgruntled voice in Leave-voting, UKIP-leaning gammon-heaven Torbay. And she wasn't changing her vote because of it.
We had a voter in Sussex, who had always voted Conservative, ring up and say he was switching his vote because of Cameron's support for gay marriage. That in itself wasn't a big surprise, but the fact that he was switching to the Greens did raise an eyebrow.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
EEA: putting the power back where we can see it http://peterjnorth.blogspot.com/2017/08/eea-putting-power-back-where-we-can-see.html That is where the EEA option is the superior model. It really is about "taking back control". When the EU brings a new piece of legislation into being (likely adopted global standards), it is not automatically adopted by Norway. There is a constitutional process whereby the Norwegian parliament debates and decides whether or not to adopt a measure. We know that there is a penalty if they do not adhere to single market rules, but ultimately it is their decision to consider the balance of trade-offs according to their own strategic trade goals and domestic values.
August 2017 was during the referendum?
He and many others had been saying the same thing for years before the referendum. Why are you insistent on trying to pretend that yours is the only one true Brexit? People like North were campaigning and researching this stuff for years before anyone had ever heard of Brexit and had come to a settled view of the best relationship for the UK to have with the EU.
And it certainly wasn't based on fog in the channel or stopping legitimate and necessary travel.
He did say a renegotiation could take place based on a permanent Customs Union at the weekend though but that would require the UK to make the concession not the EU by removing the backstop
All the negotiators are potentially straw-men in this.
Verhofstadt today also affirmed any Deal change would also require Britain to shift its stance on the future relationship, by joining a Customs Union for example. In that sense Corbyn now has the upper hand given he also demanded May shift towards permanent Customs Union membership in his meeting with her today.
Given the EU is clearly not budging on the backstop permanent Customs Union may be the only alternative left to No Deal and whether or not the 17 Tory MPs who defied the Government to vote to rule out No Deal get behind that could be crucial
Mr. Divvie, another deal would be possible if the EU ditched their red lines too...
I guess if we confuse the EU enough they might start making concessions by mistake?
Maybe, but they're not idiots, which means their insistence they are confused (in the sense they don't know what we want) is false. Whatever the reasonableness of their position they are also talking a lot of bollocks.
The EU are well aware what the UK wants, always has been. Cake and Unicorns. The EU's dilemma is how to make the Brexit Buccaneers understand that sometimes they can't get what we want without them crashing the EU economy.
That's not a dilemma, they are doing the right thing in that instance in being very clear in saying no, but they can do that without pretending they don't know what is going on. Who is that lie for?
I think the angle that the EU is going for is exasperated parent.
"We've been over this before. We've told you why you can't get a baby unicorn as a pet. Why not ask for something reasonable like a puppy instead?"
Well, I would have said the votes last night were a step forward for Theresa May's strategy of presenting the Commons with a straight choice between Deal and No Deal.
But the developing media narrative presenting her as Henry V, Elizabeth I, the Duke of Wellington and Winston Churchill all rolled into one, pitted against the knavish Europeans, seems to be at least one step backwards. If the idea of the strategy is to get the Deal through parliament rather than ending up with No Deal.
It's time we implemented our own policy then. A post-revocation government should prioritise changing all the road signs to kilometers as well as displaying EU flags on public buildings.
Mandatory riverdance lessons and free guinness for the under fives.
He did say a renegotiation could take place based on a permanent Customs Union at the weekend though but that would require the UK to make the concession not the EU by removing the backstop
All the negotiators are potentially straw-men in this.
Verhofstadt today also affirmed any Deal change would also require Britain to shift its stance on the future relationship, by joining a Customs Union for example. In that sense Corbyn now has the upper hand given he also demanded May shift towards permanent Customs Union membership in his meeting with her today.
Given the EU is clearly not budging on the backstop permanent Customs Union may be the only alternative left to No Deal and whether or not the 17 Tory MPs who defied the Government to vote to rule out No Deal get behind that could be crucial
Yeah, but he may not count either. If the heads of government can find a way to get passed all this then they'll steamroller everyone else. I don't think that'll happen, but there are no definitive voices in this. May for example isn't necessarily representative of the UK's final position (I think she's the most fixed of any on this though).
For the EU this'd be huge and avoidable damage. Noone in the UK will particularly blame May if we have a bit of a downturn, but there is no reason at all for EU voters to have that - their negotiators will have messed up if our exit produces damage for them.
He did say a renegotiation could take place based on a permanent Customs Union at the weekend though but that would require the UK to make the concession not the EU by removing the backstop
All the negotiators are potentially straw-men in this.
Verhofstadt today also affirmed any Deal change would also require Britain to shift its stance on the future relationship, by joining a Customs Union for example. In that sense Corbyn now has the upper hand given he also demanded May shift towards permanent Customs Union membership in his meeting with her today.
Given the EU is clearly not budging on the backstop permanent Customs Union may be the only alternative left to No Deal and whether or not the 17 Tory MPs who defied the Government to vote to rule out No Deal get behind that could be crucial
For the EU this'd be huge and avoidable damage. Noone in the UK will particularly blame May if we have a bit of a downturn, but there is no reason at all for EU voters to have that - their negotiators will have messed up if our exit produces damage for them.
You think that if there's a No Deal Brexit the political damage to the EU would be greater than the political damage to Theresa May?
Are those refugees permitted to work though? I remember someone telling me that there are still Palestinian refugees in Jordan from the Six Day War who live in camps and aren’t allowed to work
Once we are out with no deal there is no backstop. We either have an implemented hard border or not.
There may be direct discussions about finding ways to create a soft border again but it won’t be the current proposal - that makes no sense post an exit
When we move to No Deal the Irish border will remain just as it is now. That will help the Irish, but it won't help us.
You mean the EU have been lying throughout the negotiations?
If this is the case why die in a ditch for the backstop
The backstop is necessary to the WA because without one there could be regulatory divergence between the Republic and NI which runs contrary to the GFA.
Do you have a reference for that assertion, because I've read the text of the Belfast Agreement a few times and I've not seen any commitment to avoid regulatory divergence?
It would be helpful if people didn't keep adding imaginary clauses to the GFA.
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Metrication has been official UK policy since before we joined the EEC. Appeasing the metric martyrs was probably the first sign we'd end up with this nostalgia cult.
So you didn't complain when the government of the Republic decided to regulatory diverge from Northern Ireland.
How does it impact cross-border trade, given that all vehicles in the UK have to have km/h speedometers anyway?
Its a regulatory divergence within Ireland.
And according to wiki cars in the Republic now having kmph only speedometers so clearly an impact on cross-border trade (and travel).
It's time we implemented our own policy then. A post-revocation government should prioritise changing all the road signs to kilometers as well as displaying EU flags on public buildings.
We'll take that as an acceptance that talk about the backstop being necessary to stop regulatory divergence is bollox.
Comments
https://twitter.com/ftbrussels/status/1090663502870659073
If it was a fake supplier/invoice type fraud then no, that possibly wouldn't be picked up by auditors as the accounts form a true and fair view at year end; but this isn't that.
Myself and Nabavi have gone into this here in previous posts... it looks on the facts as available that the auditors are on a very sticky wicket.
In our pre Brexit ranting days I would nearly always learn something new from the PB collective
sadly thats gone by the wayside of late
I wonder if any of the people now talking about regulatory divergence in Ireland complained when the Republic changed from mph to kmph ?
Juncker wanted a permanent customs union in exchange for extending the Article 50 period, but Juncker thinks the current negotiated deal is the only one possible.
I don’t think auditors help themselves with attempts to limit negligence payments to the amounts of fees they receive for a given piece of work but I sort of understand why.
His drawing of Newton always reminds me of the way people walk staring at their mobile phones, oblivious to the wonders of the world around them.
If May walked back her red lines on FoM and ECJ jurisdiction they could bang out a Norway+ compromise in a few days I reckon.
' In December 2018, household expenditure on goods fell by 1.5% in volume, after decreasing slightly in November (−0.1%). This downturn was mainly due to a sharp drop in energy consumption (−4.3%) and purchases of manufactured goods (−1.9%). Over the whole fourth quarter, consumer spending on goods fell sharply (−0.7% after +0.3% in the third quarter), due to the decline in durable manufactured goods consumption.
https://www.insee.fr/en/statistiques/3706052#tableau-conso-biens-g2-en
But if you check the video it was uploaded 14 May 2015. Unless Dan Hannan has a Tardis can you explain to me how that video was filmed during the referendum and yet was posted a year before it? The referendum campaign began and ended in 2016 yet Hannan managed to upload a video you're claiming was filmed during the referendum a year earlier than it.
And you have the temerity to use the claim fake news? Have you no shame?
Actually Newton’s legacy is broader than physics. His work in charge of the Royal Mint for example. His heretical religious beliefs and study.
But its possible that it was a big talking point in DH's Conservative circles.
And according to wiki cars in the Republic now having kmph only speedometers so clearly an impact on cross-border trade (and travel).
"We've been over this before. We've told you why you can't get a baby unicorn as a pet. Why not ask for something reasonable like a puppy instead?"
pressure getting to Irish editors
Ireland will not compromise on 'a solution that works'
https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/varadkar-accused-of-leaking-confidential-details-as-brexit-chaos-deepens-37765416.html
I'd love to see their arguments comprehensively and systematically taken apart, day after day, session after session, almost more than I'd love to see Australia whitewashed or Liverpool's season implode.
No deal, humiliation, sackcloth and ashes await.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/01/martin-selmayr-is-taking-over-the-brexit-negotiations-and-thats-bad-news-for-britain/
And it certainly wasn't based on fog in the channel or stopping legitimate and necessary travel.
Given the EU is clearly not budging on the backstop permanent Customs Union may be the only alternative left to No Deal and whether or not the 17 Tory MPs who defied the Government to vote to rule out No Deal get behind that could be crucial
(I thank you!)
But the developing media narrative presenting her as Henry V, Elizabeth I, the Duke of Wellington and Winston Churchill all rolled into one, pitted against the knavish Europeans, seems to be at least one step backwards. If the idea of the strategy is to get the Deal through parliament rather than ending up with No Deal.
"Currently" rather stands out from that sentence!
For the EU this'd be huge and avoidable damage. Noone in the UK will particularly blame May if we have a bit of a downturn, but there is no reason at all for EU voters to have that - their negotiators will have messed up if our exit produces damage for them.
If not then presumably no inpact on wages