Williamson is perhaps one of only a bare handful of Mps who would be worse as PM right now than May. Seriously, what has been gained in her game of chicken/deer on the headlights act of the past 4 months? When parliament and her own cabinet don't support her strategies it cannot possibly be convincing the EU.
The front bench has been more conciliatory and saddened. This appears not to mark a shift in strategy but a divide (ahem, beyond defecting MPs) between the front bench and some backbenchers.
Also, I don't get the argument used by Greening and others. I did mention this yesterday, but saying she'll defect/desert if No Deal isn't taken off the table gives an incentive to Labour, and perhaps those on the opposing wing within the party, to stick to trying to defeat the Government.
If No Deal remains on the table but only a few Conservative MPs vote that way, it would be a weird thing to leave the party on that basis.
The crisis is deeper in Labour but more profound in the Conservatives. It is far easier to see how Labour defectors could be reconciled eventually with the Labour Party than to see how Conservative defectors could again make common cause with the Conservatives. Anti-semitism and lack of opposition to Brexit are features of Labour, but features that could be shed without losing the essence of the modern Labour Party. The core of the Conservatives now is anti-business Leave nativism and those that oppose that will need to find their political home elsewhere. Once gone, they’ll be gone.
While I agree that the Tories have a very serious problem indeed, I think you underrate how serious the anti-semitism crisis is for Labour. It is not simply the attitude to Jews, it it the whole Far Left world view from which it comes which is wrong and damaging to Labour. Anti-semitism is a symptom of a political culture which is fundamentally illiberal and anti-democratic. Excising the anti-semitic bit without dealing with the rest does not cure the problem. Ian Austin made this point yesterday but with all the understandable focus on the personal aspects of what he said this has rather been overlooked. It is not easy to see how the Far Left grip on Labour can be removed and, if it is not removed, merely beefing up the complaints process against allegations of anti-semitism will not be enough to resolve the issues Labour have.
Most Palestinians though regard the whole of the territory between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea as Palestine, and do not accept the existence of Israel per se, as is explicit in the Hamas charter. If this aim was ever achieved, Israel would be eliminated, leading to a second Holocaust, equivalent in scale to that perpetrated in Europe from 1941-5.
I think you missed out something crucial in that sentence, ie it should read something like "*which some people fear* would lead to a second holocaust". Obviously it's at least conceptually possible to have a single democratic state that protects religious freedom and human rights for Jews, Arabs, Atheists and Pastafarians.
Time is running out for Brexit. The remainer majority in the Commons becomes ever more assertive and unprincipled. No Deal is totally unacceptable but so is any deal that is actually on the table so the only choice is to remain.
I think its this week or not at all. Can May, with a bit of help from Corbyn, get her deal over the line? It will be touch and go but the ERG have one last chance to achieve their objective. If they reject it once again we will end up revoking the Article 50 notice.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
Both sides are equally guilty of this and on here you have been one of those who has most prominently promulgated the culture war. Portraying the whole enterprise as racist and xenophobic has been your way to try and reconcile your defeat but it has also made it much less likely that the Leave supporters were ever going to hold put any hands of friendship. It was the same tactic that led to Remain losing in the first place and then never did learn the lesson of that defeat.
Leavers want the result to stick. This is their problem. It goes with victory.
Three days after the referendum result I wrote a short article that was published on PB on how we should have the softest of Brexits because the vote had been so close.
Your response:
" I will never look at England in the same way again. The thread of allegiance has been broken."
You have never been interested in compromise or in accepting that Leavers were anything other than xenophobes and racists. You are the problem Mr Meeks, not us.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
Big G Eagles ScottP Scrapheap Stark Topping Felix Richard N (stretch target)
Not me - unless May opts to advocate a No Deal. However, I don't believe that's her strategy.
And me. No deal would make me a TIG
We have been moaning on here for years about how jaded and samey our politicians have become. We hated the blandness. The lack of originality. Now you are all drooling over a bunch of identikit no marks, just because they have one thing you agree with them on. Bless.
No deal will only happen if ERG win and I cannot be part of something so utterly stupid
You already are im afraid. How else to explain May attempting things she herself said was not possible other than to find down the clock. And given 115 mps will not break at crunch time she knows that means the deal will never pass. Ergo, she is pursuing no deal by stealth because the ERG have won with her. They are too powerful for her to ignore
There is only one strategy in Downing Street right now. Run the clock down, get the EU to blink at the prospect of No Deal, go back to the Commons with Hotel California Brexit removed - and tell them its the best it's gonna get, guys. Take it - or face the wrath of the 17.4m.
The EU might do something with the backstop but the UK is going to have give something to get something surely? We can speculate about what juicy morsel they could off to get the EU to fuck over the 26 counties and resile from a unanimous position they have held without wavering for a year...
I find it strange that people still think the EU will blink. Why would they - they want to make sure no other country does anything as insane ever again and backing down isn’t going to help them achieve that.
They would blink if they thought there was any prospect of No Deal, because they would face the prospect of losing their trade surplus and a huge budget deficit. They won't because there isn't.
Their strategy all along has been to keep us in the EU and to that end to offer nothing but a vassal state status which we are bound to in perpetuity if they wish and which even Leavers consider to be worse than remaining.
Big G Eagles ScottP Scrapheap Stark Topping Felix Richard N (stretch target)
Not me - unless May opts to advocate a No Deal. However, I don't believe that's her strategy.
And me. No deal would make me a TIG
We have been moaning on here for years about how jaded and samey our politicians have become. We hated the blandness. The lack of originality. Now you are all drooling over a bunch of identikit no marks, just because they have one thing you agree with them on. Bless.
Indeed.
The droolers are using the splitters as a vehicle for their own individual wishlists.
There is only one strategy in Downing Street right now. Run the clock down, get the EU to blink at the prospect of No Deal, go back to the Commons with Hotel California Brexit removed - and tell them its the best it's gonna get, guys. Take it - or face the wrath of the 17.4m.
The EU might do something with the backstop but the UK is going to have give something to get something surely? We can speculate about what juicy morsel they could off to get the EU to fuck over the 26 counties and resile from a unanimous position they have held without wavering for a year...
I find it strange that people still think the EU will blink. Why would they - they want to make sure no other country does anything as insane ever again and backing down isn’t going to help them achieve that.
Total delusion by halfwits who actually imagine the UK is something special and EU need them, just unbelievable.
Time is running out for Brexit. The remainer majority in the Commons becomes ever more assertive and unprincipled. No Deal is totally unacceptable but so is any deal that is actually on the table so the only choice is to remain.
I think its this week or not at all. Can May, with a bit of help from Corbyn, get her deal over the line? It will be touch and go but the ERG have one last chance to achieve their objective. If they reject it once again we will end up revoking the Article 50 notice.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
It was the same tactic that led to Remain losing in the first place and then never did learn the lesson of that defeat.
Leavers want the result to stick. This is their problem. It goes with victory.
Three days after the referendum result I wrote a short article that was published on PB on how we should have the softest of Brexits because the vote had been so close.
Your response:
" I will never look at England in the same way again. The thread of allegiance has been broken."
You have never been interested in compromise or in accepting that Leavers were anything other than xenophobes and racists. You are the problem Mr Meeks, not us.
It’s hard to believe that the whole problem with Brexit is Alastair. I think it is rather that you are not representative of the forces driving leave (any more that Alastair is of remain) - if you were, we would not be where we are.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
It's amazing that remainers who tell us we don't know why people voted leave also tell us they know precisely why people voted remain.
My wife voted Remain and we voted at the same time and cancelled each other out. It wasn't a big issue, but about three weeks later I told her I doubted it would ever happen. Why? Because the phrasing of so many politicians. Starting off by agreeing the nation had given its verdict, they often went on with an obvious 'but' … It was clear their hearts weren't in it.
They know time is on their side. The EU would go into cautious mode (no major changes,) and the operation Project Fear for a couple more years, although not changing many minds, might cause enough uncertainty.
Unfortunately I fear Remaining, by whatever means it is achieved, won't settle the issue. The EU is still a half-way house and only has one direction to go in. Trying to close down discussion would be futile. The only way to settle the issue is to tie us into Europe even more closely so we can never leave. It's been a shock to them that it hasn't already happened so they may tread cautiously for a while.
My wife asked if I'd vote if we had another referendum. I said I probably wouldn't as there was little point. Extending the deadline amounts to the same thing. There's been a brief battle as to who rules the UK. It's the MPs who have the power, not the electorate.
I feel young again in some ways. I was right when I was eighteen - they're not to be trusted.
I visited Leytonstone for the first time in my life last Thursday. I was at a meeting of a support group for survivors of cancer - a fairly elderly group. Afterwards I overheard a discussion of Brexit. It was obviously a group of people who had talked about it before. It sounded like they had lost their enthusiasm for it. Mr Cryer may well simply be reflecting his voters' changing views.
Leytonstone only three stops from me on the Central line!
Labour has always been an alliance of social democrats, methodists and democratic socialists. That’s why the far left always hated it. Now that the far left has been let in and has taken control there is no room for the social democratic or methodist elements. Some will leave, as the TIGs have done, others will be deselected. Some will hold out because their CLPs have not been infiltrated. The future will be determined by what happens when Corbyn steps down some time after Labour loses the next general election. At that point we’ll find out how much of his support was ideological and how much was personal. If someone from the softer left takes over, Labour will probably stay together; if the far left consolidates its hold, then the game will be up.
How on earth can you think that the game is not already up?
Big G Eagles ScottP Scrapheap Stark Topping Felix Richard N (stretch target)
Not me - unless May opts to advocate a No Deal. However, I don't believe that's her strategy.
And me. No deal would make me a TIG
We have been moaning on here for years about how jaded and samey our politicians have become. We hated the blandness. The lack of originality. Now you are all drooling over a bunch of identikit no marks, just because they have one thing you agree with them on. Bless.
No deal will only happen if ERG win and I cannot be part of something so utterly stupid
You already are im afraid. How else to explain May attempting things she herself said was not possible other than to find down the clock. And given 115 mps will not break at crunch time she knows that means the deal will never pass. Ergo, she is pursuing no deal by stealth because the ERG have won with her. They are too powerful for her to ignore
We do not have no deal yet. I expect either TM deal will pass or the HOC will take back control.
TIGs only comes into it if ERG win and no deal happens as I would resign from my party
You know who else is not the Tories? TIG. Lib Dems. Plaid Cyrmu. The SNP.
"We're not the Tories" is a meaningless and rotten core to build an edifice upon. For a long time in Scotland Labour dominated with that because the Tories were hated but when a viable alternative came the whole party collapsed.
Labour didn't collapse IN Scotland because the SNP was a viable "not the Tories" party. They collapsed because 35% of their voters were in favour of Independence and the Labour Party repeatedly called them Nazis during IndyRef.
The front bench has been more conciliatory and saddened. This appears not to mark a shift in strategy but a divide (ahem, beyond defecting MPs) between the front bench and some backbenchers.
Also, I don't get the argument used by Greening and others. I did mention this yesterday, but saying she'll defect/desert if No Deal isn't taken off the table gives an incentive to Labour, and perhaps those on the opposing wing within the party, to stick to trying to defeat the Government.
If No Deal remains on the table but only a few Conservative MPs vote that way, it would be a weird thing to leave the party on that basis.
The crisis is deeper in Labour but more profound in the Conservatives. It is far easier to see how Labour defectors could be reconciled eventually with the Labour Party than to see how Conservative defectors could again make common cause with the Conservatives. Anti-semitism and lack of opposition to Brexit are features of Labour, but features that could be shed without losing the essence of the modern Labour Party. The core of the Conservatives now is anti-business Leave nativism and those that oppose that will need to find their political home elsewhere. Once gone, they’ll be gone.
While I agree that the Tories have a very serious problem indeed, I think you underrate how serious the anti-semitism crisis is for Labour. It is not simply the attitude to Jews, it it the whole Far Left world view from which it comes which is wrong and damaging to Labour. Anti-semitism is a symptom of a political culture which is fundamentally illiberal and anti-democratic. Excising the anti-semitic bit without dealing with the rest does not cure the problem. Ian Austin made this point yesterday but with all the understandable focus on the personal aspects of what he said this has rather been overlooked. It is not easy to see how the Far Left grip on Labour can be removed and, if it is not removed, merely beefing up the complaints process against allegations of anti-semitism will not be enough to resolve the issues Labour have.
Thinking about anti-semitism there seems to be various levels of it including:
1) General hatred of Jews, sometimes including a belief of world wide conspiracies
2) A hatred of Israel, sometimes including a belief that Jews in other countries are Israel's 'little helpers'
3) A more minor view that Jews are 'a bit different, not like us'
4) A willingness to pander to various of the above for political gain with the use of anti-semitic tropes - Labour against Howard in 2005 and the Conservatives against EdM in 2015
When will the people who keep banging on about immigration being a good thing realise that it is a ponzi scheme. The people at the top ( elderly etc ) benefit but sooner or later the incomers get old then we need more coming in at the bottom. There is a limit to this we can't keep stealing the youth of other countries eventually there wont be enough.
Silly post.
You may think so but I don't believe so its not a comment on the good or ills of immigration it is a comment on that immigration isn't a long term solution and politicians need to get real about how we are going to deal with the demographic shift rather than just sticking the plaster of "oh we will just get some people in from over there to wipe arses"
Labour has always been an alliance of social democrats, methodists and democratic socialists. That’s why the far left always hated it. Now that the far left has been let in and has taken control there is no room for the social democratic or methodist elements. Some will leave, as the TIGs have done, others will be deselected. Some will hold out because their CLPs have not been infiltrated. The future will be determined by what happens when Corbyn steps down some time after Labour loses the next general election. At that point we’ll find out how much of his support was ideological and how much was personal. If someone from the softer left takes over, Labour will probably stay together; if the far left consolidates its hold, then the game will be up.
How on earth can you think that the game is not already up?
He likes the sound of his words echoing around the empty stable.
I visited Leytonstone for the first time in my life last Thursday. I was at a meeting of a support group for survivors of cancer - a fairly elderly group. Afterwards I overheard a discussion of Brexit. It was obviously a group of people who had talked about it before. It sounded like they had lost their enthusiasm for it. Mr Cryer may well simply be reflecting his voters' changing views.
Leytonstone only three stops from me on the Central line!
And I travelled there on the Central line. Spookey!
My wife voted Remain and we voted at the same time and cancelled each other out. It wasn't a big issue, but about three weeks later I told her I doubted it would ever happen. Why? Because the phrasing of so many politicians. Starting off by agreeing the nation had given its verdict, they often went on with an obvious 'but' … It was clear their hearts weren't in it.
They know time is on their side. The EU would go into cautious mode (no major changes,) and the operation Project Fear for a couple more years, although not changing many minds, might cause enough uncertainty.
Unfortunately I fear Remaining, by whatever means it is achieved, won't settle the issue. The EU is still a half-way house and only has one direction to go in. Trying to close down discussion would be futile. The only way to settle the issue is to tie us into Europe even more closely so we can never leave. It's been a shock to them that it hasn't already happened so they may tread cautiously for a while.
My wife asked if I'd vote if we had another referendum. I said I probably wouldn't as there was little point. Extending the deadline amounts to the same thing. There's been a brief battle as to who rules the UK. It's the MPs who have the power, not the electorate.
I feel young again in some ways. I was right when I was eighteen - they're not to be trusted.
It’s hard to believe that the whole problem with Brexit is Alastair. I think it is rather that you are not representative of the forces driving leave (any more that Alastair is of remain) - if you were, we would not be where we are.
Of course he is not the whole problem. But he is representative of part of the problem; the very large group of people who have never accepted the referendum result was legitimate and were not open to any form of compromise that might have made Brexit work. They are just as bad as the headbangers on the Leave side crying out for Brexit purity.
the very large group of people who have never accepted the referendum result was legitimate and were not open to any form of compromise that might have made Brexit work.
It wasn't legitimate (the campaign broke the law) and there is no sort of compromise that can make Brexit "work"
Yes, the Kyle amendment looks a possible way out of the mess. Buy the May deal with whatever assurances she comes up with (so "we have delivered Brexit") and have a referendum on whether it makes more sense than remaining. The ERG won't like it (but everyone from BigG to me can live with that) and it will present challenges in the referendum for both Tories and Labour (whose side are we all on?), but it's an actual workable plan, and honestly there are not a lot of them about.
Labour has always been an alliance of social democrats, methodists and democratic socialists. That’s why the far left always hated it. Now that the far left has been let in and has taken control there is no room for the social democratic or methodist elements. Some will leave, as the TIGs have done, others will be deselected. Some will hold out because their CLPs have not been infiltrated. The future will be determined by what happens when Corbyn steps down some time after Labour loses the next general election. At that point we’ll find out how much of his support was ideological and how much was personal. If someone from the softer left takes over, Labour will probably stay together; if the far left consolidates its hold, then the game will be up.
How on earth can you think that the game is not already up?
He likes the sound of his words echoing around the empty stable.
Arguably there are only two questions left that are worth asking about the Labour Party:
1. Can it ever win another General Election? It would be foolish to write it off: one must pray for the best and prepare for the worst on that score.
2. What best represents the modern Labour Party: the Hammer & Sickle or the Swastika? Probably the latter, though the Soviets weren't always that keen on Judaism either.
When will the people who keep banging on about immigration being a good thing realise that it is a ponzi scheme. The people at the top ( elderly etc ) benefit but sooner or later the incomers get old then we need more coming in at the bottom. There is a limit to this we can't keep stealing the youth of other countries eventually there wont be enough.
Silly post.
You may think so but I don't believe so its not a comment on the good or ills of immigration it is a comment on that immigration isn't a long term solution and politicians need to get real about how we are going to deal with the demographic shift rather than just sticking the plaster of "oh we will just get some people in from over there to wipe arses"
But the demographic profiles of nations change through time. We have a glut of old people right now because the effect of increased life expectancy is working its way through the system at the same time as families are having fewer children. These sorts of trends always level off and indeed on life expectancy there are early signs it may even reverse.
Further, very many immigrants who come looking for work return home before old age. You think all those Geordie builders and bricklayers are still living in Germany?
Further, the economic benefits of immigration are well documented. Not least, you are acquiring work-ready adults without incurring the cost of their childhood and education. One of the principle motors of the USA's ascent to superpower status was its taking in of up to a million adults every year in the late 19th/early 20th century, with the unhealthy and unenterprising ones screened out, that had been brought up and educated by European countries that had less need for their labour. The economic benefit of this was colossal.
the very large group of people who have never accepted the referendum result was legitimate and were not open to any form of compromise that might have made Brexit work.
It wasn't legitimate (the campaign broke the law) and there is no sort of compromise that can make Brexit "work"
Apart from that, great post
And of course here we have Scott as another classic example of what I was talking about. You cannot find a compromise with such extremists as they have no interest in anything other than reversing the decision. For them, to find a workable way forward would be a complete failure.
And of course here we have Scott as another classic example of what I was talking about. You cannot find a compromise with such extremists as they have no interest in anything other than reversing the decision. For them, to find a workable way forward would be a complete failure.
Ok, genius, answer the question posed in the article by Sir Ivan Rogers.
Liam Fox wants no tariffs, so we can still buy cheap food
Michael Gove wants tariffs so our farmers don't go out of business
Which one of those versions of Brexit "works"?
There isn't one, and you are smart enough to know it, just not honest enough to admit it, yet.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
It's amazing that remainers who tell us we don't know why people voted leave also tell us they know precisely why people voted remain.
Apparently the 48% are all supporters of EverCloserUnion but the 52% can be divided down into groups all of which are lower than 48% and so can be ignored.
Morning all. Reading this forum over the last week or so one would certainly get the impression that the prospect of a Corbyn led Labour government is all but dead. I think there might be an element of wish fulfillment in this - since let's face it the man and his politics are about as popular on here as an unrepentant ISIS bride in a British tabloid - but what I will say, what is to me undeniably true, is that Glastonbury 2017 seems a long long time ago.
GTTO? - oh yes please - but perhaps we need another way to do it.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
It's amazing that remainers who tell us we don't know why people voted leave also tell us they know precisely why people voted remain.
Apparently the 48% are all supporters of EverCloserUnion but the 52% can be divided down into groups all of which are lower than 48% and so can be ignored.
48% voted for an opt out from ever closer union. 52% didn’t like the sound of that.
Labour has always been an alliance of social democrats, methodists and democratic socialists. That’s why the far left always hated it. Now that the far left has been let in and has taken control there is no room for the social democratic or methodist elements. Some will leave, as the TIGs have done, others will be deselected. Some will hold out because their CLPs have not been infiltrated. The future will be determined by what happens when Corbyn steps down some time after Labour loses the next general election. At that point we’ll find out how much of his support was ideological and how much was personal. If someone from the softer left takes over, Labour will probably stay together; if the far left consolidates its hold, then the game will be up.
How on earth can you think that the game is not already up?
Because the game isn't already up. Corbyn is a passing note in a history book. As Blair was.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
The Tories did not win a majority at the last election and are in the process of dropping the tens of thousands commitment.
Time is running out for Brexit. The remainer majority in the Commons becomes ever more assertive and unprincipled. No Deal is totally unacceptable but so is any deal that is actually on the table so the only choice is to remain.
I think its this week or not at all. Can May, with a bit of help from Corbyn, get her deal over the line? It will be touch and go but the ERG have one last chance to achieve their objective. If they reject it once again we will end up revoking the Article 50 notice.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
Both sides are equally guilty of this and on here you have been one of those who has most prominently promulgated the culture war. Portraying the whole enterprise as racist and xenophobic has been your way to try and reconcile your defeat but it has also made it much less likely that the Leave supporters were ever going to hold put any hands of friendship. It was the same tactic that led to Remain losing in the first place and then never did learn the lesson of that defeat.
Quite. He regularly refers to people who want Brexit as been followers of a death cult..
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
The Tories did not win a majority at the last election and are in the process of dropping the tens of thousands commitment.
So you'll agree that we've had eight years of governments which have failed to implement their manifesto immigration policy.
Labour has always been an alliance of social democrats, methodists and democratic socialists. That’s why the far left always hated it. Now that the far left has been let in and has taken control there is no room for the social democratic or methodist elements. Some will leave, as the TIGs have done, others will be deselected. Some will hold out because their CLPs have not been infiltrated. The future will be determined by what happens when Corbyn steps down some time after Labour loses the next general election. At that point we’ll find out how much of his support was ideological and how much was personal. If someone from the softer left takes over, Labour will probably stay together; if the far left consolidates its hold, then the game will be up.
How on earth can you think that the game is not already up?
Because the game isn't already up. Corbyn is a passing note in a history book. As Blair was.
If this incantation of Labour got power - god help us all
Labour has always been an alliance of social democrats, methodists and democratic socialists. That’s why the far left always hated it. Now that the far left has been let in and has taken control there is no room for the social democratic or methodist elements. Some will leave, as the TIGs have done, others will be deselected. Some will hold out because their CLPs have not been infiltrated. The future will be determined by what happens when Corbyn steps down some time after Labour loses the next general election. At that point we’ll find out how much of his support was ideological and how much was personal. If someone from the softer left takes over, Labour will probably stay together; if the far left consolidates its hold, then the game will be up.
How on earth can you think that the game is not already up?
He likes the sound of his words echoing around the empty stable.
Arguably there are only two questions left that are worth asking about the Labour Party:
1. Can it ever win another General Election? It would be foolish to write it off: one must pray for the best and prepare for the worst on that score.
2. What best represents the modern Labour Party: the Hammer & Sickle or the Swastika? Probably the latter, though the Soviets weren't always that keen on Judaism either.
The best guarantee of Labour winning another election is our electoral system, they just have to wait for Buggin's turn
The Leave project might just be in its death throes over the next few weeks. If so my mind drifts back to the campaign in 2016 when I and many, many others were shot down and derided for daring to query exactly what kind of Brexit the Leave campaign was looking for. 'That's down to the government of the day they said and nothing to do with us'. It's kinda funny looking back now to think how that strategy has punned out for them, if as seems highly likely we endu with either the crappiest clusterfu** of an exit in history ...or revoke and remain. Meanwhile here in southern Spain lawyers and insurance companies are raking it in as 'expats in their thousands are scrambling to obtain residence cards, driving licences and health insurance! Form the perspective of probity, 'doing the right thing' , etc it's one of the few positives of the whole experience.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
I think that there will incalculable damage to our democracy because of this. Whilst I agree with you that much of the damage by the morons in the ERG in particular was self inflicted the complete dishonesty and hypocrisy of those that got re-elected to implement the vote and then did everything in their power to thwart it disgusts me. The Tiggers are a good start since none of them will be in the next Parliament but there are dozens more who need to go.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
But we don't have unrestricted immigration from the EU. Successive UK governments have chosen to have unrestricted Immigration from the EU.
And of course here we have Scott as another classic example of what I was talking about. You cannot find a compromise with such extremists as they have no interest in anything other than reversing the decision. For them, to find a workable way forward would be a complete failure.
Ok, genius, answer the question posed in the article by Sir Ivan Rogers.
Liam Fox wants no tariffs, so we can still buy cheap food
Michael Gove wants tariffs so our farmers don't go out of business
Which one of those versions of Brexit "works"?
There isn't one, and you are smart enough to know it, just not honest enough to admit it, yet.
I proposed a working version of Brexit on 26th June 2016. It was the one I had supported all the way through and I set out my reasons for why I thought it should be pursued. The fact that individual politicians want forms of Brexit that are not possible does not for a second mean that there is no form of Brexit tat is possible.
You know this just as well as the rest of us but you are so committed to overturning the referendum result that you refuse to acknowledge that any form of Brexit is possible. As I said, you are part of the problem.
Leavers can’t say they weren’t warned. The abject failure even to attempt to reach out to Remain voters continues to be the most mystifying inaction by the victors. So they are in serious danger of losing the peace.
SNIP.
You’re looking at the wrong culprits. The referendum could and should have been implemented without more than the usual drama. But Leavers chose to make this into a culture war against opponents who had only been narrowly defeated and who retained strategic strength.
We are where we are because Theresa May prioritised positive headlines in the right wing press over building a national consensus for Brexit - and no-one on the Leave side stood up to her. When the enemies of the people were being called out and the citizens of nowhere being attacked they all cheered her on. Likewise, no-one stopped to think through the full implications of the red lines she draw. Those have been the defining post-referendum moments - the ones specifically designed to exclude the 48% from the national conversation.
I agree with half of that. But Theresa May’s red lines were in accordance with the referendum campaign fought. I don’t think she could have changed them radically given the campaign Leavers chose to fall in behind.
I disagree. It would have taken leadership, but that is a different thing. We know that 48% voted to retain freedom of movement, for example. It is hard to believe that at least 10% of the Leave vote could not have lived with it to ensure a smooth Brexit and a good deal for the UK.
Yet many of those who voted Remain don't support unrestricted immigration from the EU.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
But we don't have unrestricted immigration from the EU. Successive UK governments have chosen to have unrestricted Immigration from the EU.
Also from elsewhere to boot, government policy to lower wages and enrich them and their chums. We need immigration but not at the levels that government policy has delivered by choice.
When will the people who keep banging on about immigration being a good thing realise that it is a ponzi scheme. The people at the top ( elderly etc ) benefit but sooner or later the incomers get old then we need more coming in at the bottom. There is a limit to this we can't keep stealing the youth of other countries eventually there wont be enough.
Silly post.
You may think so but I don't believe so its not a comment on the good or ills of immigration it is a comment on that immigration isn't a long term solution and politicians need to get real about how we are going to deal with the demographic shift rather than just sticking the plaster of "oh we will just get some people in from over there to wipe arses"
But the demographic profiles of nations change through time. We have a glut of old people right now because the effect of increased life expectancy is working its way through the system at the same time as families are having fewer children. These sorts of trends always level off and indeed on life expectancy there are early signs it may even reverse.
Further, very many immigrants who come looking for work return home before old age. You think all those Geordie builders and bricklayers are still living in Germany?
Further, the economic benefits of immigration are well documented. Not least, you are acquiring work-ready adults without incurring the cost of their childhood and education. One of the principle motors of the USA's ascent to superpower status was its taking in of up to a million adults every year in the late 19th/early 20th century, with the unhealthy and unenterprising ones screened out, that had been brought up and educated by European countries that had less need for their labour. The economic benefit of this was colossal.
youre living in the last century
all populations are now ageing
likewise if we are on the cusp of the AI era why do we need lots of people ?
Chris Williamson on Today says he’s never seen any bullying in the Labour Party and says antisemitism is just an excuse for right wing MPs to damage Corbyn. Car crash interview.
I believe you that was probably bad, but how is that different from his other media appearances?
The function of Chris Williamson is to make McDonnell look like sweet reason personified!
You may think so but I don't believe so its not a comment on the good or ills of immigration it is a comment on that immigration isn't a long term solution and politicians need to get real about how we are going to deal with the demographic shift rather than just sticking the plaster of "oh we will just get some people in from over there to wipe arses"
But the demographic profiles of nations change through time. We have a glut of old people right now because the effect of increased life expectancy is working its way through the system at the same time as families are having fewer children. These sorts of trends always level off and indeed on life expectancy there are early signs it may even reverse.
Further, very many immigrants who come looking for work return home before old age. You think all those Geordie builders and bricklayers are still living in Germany?
Further, the economic benefits of immigration are well documented. Not least, you are acquiring work-ready adults without incurring the cost of their childhood and education. One of the principle motors of the USA's ascent to superpower status was its taking in of up to a million adults every year in the late 19th/early 20th century, with the unhealthy and unenterprising ones screened out, that had been brought up and educated by European countries that had less need for their labour. The economic benefit of this was colossal.
Yes some immigrants go home,a lot however do not certainly not a shortage of families than seem pretty much settled around here and plenty of schools which have the problem of the majority of pupils not having english as a first language. These people will get old and need care to.
Our politicians (and everyone elses) are failing to address the issues we are going to face in the next 50 years of demographic shift and increasing automation. While people argue for the latter that in the past when it has happened new jobs have been created I remain unconvinced. The last round of automation automated muscle allowing a worker to do more. Jobs then shifted to ones requiring brain power. Now we are going to be increasingly automating brain.
The only thing the human will have left that a machine can't do then is creativity and frankly there just aren't that many people that are that creative.
It seems to me you would rather stick your head in the sand. I have deliberately ignored your waffle about the economic benefits you will notice as I pointed out to you my post wasn't about the good or ills of immigration just the can kicking nature of it
When will the people who keep banging on about immigration being a good thing realise that it is a ponzi scheme. The people at the top ( elderly etc ) benefit but sooner or later the incomers get old then we need more coming in at the bottom. There is a limit to this we can't keep stealing the youth of other countries eventually there wont be enough.
Silly post.
You may think so but I don't believe so its not a comment on the good or ills of immigration it is a comment on that immigration isn't a long term solution and politicians need to get real about how we are going to deal with the demographic shift rather than just sticking the plaster of "oh we will just get some people in from over there to wipe arses"
But the demographic profiles of nations change through time. We have a glut of old people right now because the effect of increased life expectancy is working its way through the system at the same time as families are having fewer children. These sorts of trends always level off and indeed on life expectancy there are early signs it may even reverse.
Further, very many immigrants who come looking for work return home before old age. You think all those Geordie builders and bricklayers are still living in Germany?
Further, the economic benefits of immigration are well documented. Not least, you are acquiring work-ready adults without incurring the cost of their childhood and education. One of the principle motors of the USA's ascent to superpower status was its taking in of up to a million adults every year in the late 19th/early 20th century, with the unhealthy and unenterprising ones screened out, that had been brought up and educated by European countries that had less need for their labour. The economic benefit of this was colossal.
youre living in the last century
all populations are now ageing
likewise if we are on the cusp of the AI era why do we need lots of people ?
we wont
To post my favourite graph, even with current rates of immigration, ours is an ageing population. Imigration mostly smooths the pyramid. And if AI is so powerful, then how come we have such high employment, and stagnant productivity?
And of course here we have Scott as another classic example of what I was talking about. You cannot find a compromise with such extremists as they have no interest in anything other than reversing the decision. For them, to find a workable way forward would be a complete failure.
Ok, genius, answer the question posed in the article by Sir Ivan Rogers.
Liam Fox wants no tariffs, so we can still buy cheap food
Michael Gove wants tariffs so our farmers don't go out of business
Which one of those versions of Brexit "works"?
There isn't one, and you are smart enough to know it, just not honest enough to admit it, yet.
That is part of the Brexiteers dilemma. The "brains(!?!)" of the campaign are free trading libertarians, but the footsoldiers are much more protectionist. The latter are wise enough to remember that "free trade" only worked or 19th Century Britain at the point of a gun, and became much less popular when powerful commercial rivals came on the scene.
Comments
Your response:
" I will never look at England in the same way again. The thread of allegiance has been broken."
You have never been interested in compromise or in accepting that Leavers were anything other than xenophobes and racists. You are the problem Mr Meeks, not us.
Not to mention that we have had three general elections won with manifesto commitments to reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands.
Their strategy all along has been to keep us in the EU and to that end to offer nothing but a vassal state status which we are bound to in perpetuity if they wish and which even Leavers consider to be worse than remaining.
The droolers are using the splitters as a vehicle for their own individual wishlists.
They know time is on their side. The EU would go into cautious mode (no major changes,) and the operation Project Fear for a couple more years, although not changing many minds, might cause enough uncertainty.
Unfortunately I fear Remaining, by whatever means it is achieved, won't settle the issue. The EU is still a half-way house and only has one direction to go in. Trying to close down discussion would be futile. The only way to settle the issue is to tie us into Europe even more closely so we can never leave. It's been a shock to them that it hasn't already happened so they may tread cautiously for a while.
My wife asked if I'd vote if we had another referendum. I said I probably wouldn't as there was little point. Extending the deadline amounts to the same thing. There's been a brief battle as to who rules the UK. It's the MPs who have the power, not the electorate.
I feel young again in some ways. I was right when I was eighteen - they're not to be trusted.
TIGs only comes into it if ERG win and no deal happens as I would resign from my party
1) General hatred of Jews, sometimes including a belief of world wide conspiracies
2) A hatred of Israel, sometimes including a belief that Jews in other countries are Israel's 'little helpers'
3) A more minor view that Jews are 'a bit different, not like us'
4) A willingness to pander to various of the above for political gain with the use of anti-semitic tropes - Labour against Howard in 2005 and the Conservatives against EdM in 2015
I visited Leytonstone for the first time in my life last Thursday. I was at a meeting of a support group for survivors of cancer - a fairly elderly group. Afterwards I overheard a discussion of Brexit. It was obviously a group of people who had talked about it before. It sounded like they had lost their enthusiasm for it. Mr Cryer may well simply be reflecting his voters' changing views.
Leytonstone only three stops from me on the Central line!
And I travelled there on the Central line. Spookey!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9yzL7BgIrI
Apart from that, great post
1. Can it ever win another General Election? It would be foolish to write it off: one must pray for the best and prepare for the worst on that score.
2. What best represents the modern Labour Party: the Hammer & Sickle or the Swastika? Probably the latter, though the Soviets weren't always that keen on Judaism either.
Further, very many immigrants who come looking for work return home before old age. You think all those Geordie builders and bricklayers are still living in Germany?
Further, the economic benefits of immigration are well documented. Not least, you are acquiring work-ready adults without incurring the cost of their childhood and education. One of the principle motors of the USA's ascent to superpower status was its taking in of up to a million adults every year in the late 19th/early 20th century, with the unhealthy and unenterprising ones screened out, that had been brought up and educated by European countries that had less need for their labour. The economic benefit of this was colossal.
Liam Fox wants no tariffs, so we can still buy cheap food
Michael Gove wants tariffs so our farmers don't go out of business
Which one of those versions of Brexit "works"?
There isn't one, and you are smart enough to know it, just not honest enough to admit it, yet.
GTTO? - oh yes please - but perhaps we need another way to do it.
A-HA!
You know this just as well as the rest of us but you are so committed to overturning the referendum result that you refuse to acknowledge that any form of Brexit is possible. As I said, you are part of the problem.
We need immigration but not at the levels that government policy has delivered by choice.
all populations are now ageing
likewise if we are on the cusp of the AI era why do we need lots of people ?
we wont
The clueless imbecile who thought Brits could have an Irish passport is now calling on the 3 who want Brexit delayed to be sacked.
Yes some immigrants go home,a lot however do not certainly not a shortage of families than seem pretty much settled around here and plenty of schools which have the problem of the majority of pupils not having english as a first language. These people will get old and need care to.
Our politicians (and everyone elses) are failing to address the issues we are going to face in the next 50 years of demographic shift and increasing automation. While people argue for the latter that in the past when it has happened new jobs have been created I remain unconvinced. The last round of automation automated muscle allowing a worker to do more. Jobs then shifted to ones requiring brain power. Now we are going to be increasingly automating brain.
The only thing the human will have left that a machine can't do then is creativity and frankly there just aren't that many people that are that creative.
It seems to me you would rather stick your head in the sand. I have deliberately ignored your waffle about the economic benefits you will notice as I pointed out to you my post wasn't about the good or ills of immigration just the can kicking nature of it
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/978302412363624448?s=19