The first question speaks volumes - 14 counties said the county game prepares players well for test cricket, 3 said it didn't. None so blind as those that won't see.
Corbyn is full of crap. The only reason its close is due to abstentions. Time for Tories to 3-line whip all of these ludicrous options if it happens again.
Hence my suggestion, how can you compare society’s benefitting differently in investment home and abroad, the impact on taxation and households, and a general sense of happiness and well being, due to income from oil revenue? What could work fine in one situation with a populace very happy could be regressive in a different culture, different psychology with deindustrial, health and social care deficits stacking up.
The problem is you have now moved on from quoting false figures and making uninformed statements about how EFTA works to debating happiness in Norway - and with someone who lived and worked there for 15 years.
But the basic position is that if we did choose the Norway option we would pay a lot less to the EU for Single Market access and would be subject to perhaps only 30% of the legislation that we currently have to adopt from the EU. All whilst keeping our trade with them.
It is a very attractive proposition for anyone who is not bothered about the freedom of movement issue.
Let’s skip to the bottom line. We can trade facts to the point a brexit preference becomes abstract. like enjoying time spent with an Eskimo society it works very well, let’s copy them. But there are two killer facts undermining your preference. Norway is a Nordic country of 5 million people. The success or attractiveness of the Norway model is bogus because it is being underwritten by a wealth UK does not have.
Nope. That is completely irrelevant. We are talking about basic facts. How much does Norway pay compared to the UK for single market access and how much of the EU legislation does it have to adopt. Neither of these things are dependent on how 'Nordic' each country is nor on how much oil wealth they have.
You are using utterly irrelevant arguments to try and obfuscate after your basic figures were found to be false.
Hence my suggestion, how can you compare society’s benefitting differently in investment home and abroad, the impact on taxation and households, and a general sense of happiness and well being, due to income from oil revenue? What could work fine in one situation with a populace very happy could be regressive in a different culture, different psychology with deindustrial, health and social care deficits stacking up.
The problem is you have now moved on from quoting false figures and making uninformed statements about how EFTA works to debating happiness in Norway - and with someone who lived and worked there for 15 years.
But the basic position is that if we did choose the Norway option we would pay a lot less to the EU for Single Market access and would be subject to perhaps only 30% of the legislation that we currently have to adopt from the EU. All whilst keeping our trade with them.
It is a very attractive proposition for anyone who is not bothered about the freedom of movement issue.
Let’s skip to the bottom line. We can trade facts to the point a brexit preference becomes abstract. like enjoying time spent with an Eskimo society it works very well, let’s copy them. But there are two killer facts undermining your preference. Norway is a Nordic country of 5 million people. The success or attractiveness of the Norway model is bogus because it is being underwritten by a wealth UK does not have.
And there, in a nutshell, the entire brexit struggle. Are we strong, stable and wealthy with good times ahead. Or do we have to make decisions based on a downward trajectory and diminishing returns in the years and decades ahead?
Motion C : Customs Union (Clarke) For 276 against 273
Motion Common Market 2.0 (Boles) For 261 Against 282
Motion E: Confirmatory Public Vote (Kyle/Wilson) For 280 Against 292
Motion G: Parliamentary Supremacy (Cherry) For 191 Against 292
So no Motion again gets a majority but Customs Union again closest and none gets more than May's Deal, she may bring back her Deal again but Letwin now likely to try and switch to preference voting on Wednesday.
Motion C : Customs Union (Clarke) For 276 against 273
Motion Common Market 2.0 (Boles) For 261 Against 282
Motion E: Confirmatory Public Vote (Kyle/Wilson) For 280 Against 292
Motion G: Parliamentary Supremacy (Cherry) For 191 Against 292
So no Motion again gets a majority but Customs Union again closest and none gets more than May's Deal, she may bring back her Deal again but Letwin now likely to try and switch to preference voting on Wednesday.
I realise D colon got turned into , but strangely fitting
Well, the top three are all less unpopular than the WA. Take out the Cabinet votes for the WA and all four of them are more popular.
Put the Tory whips against all of them and see how popular they are. The WA agreement gets closest with single party support. It's time for the Labour cowards to put the nation first and vote through the WA.
Lol what a chump. He needs to compromise. Sincerely held beliefs my arse.
Given he had already said he would not stand again at the next election he is clearly having a strop at seeing his last chance of making his mark in politics go up in smoke.
2nd ref only 12 votes adrift. And 3 softest options all came closer than May's deal.
Because of cabinet abstentions and no Tory whipping operation. Line those two up against any of these options and suddenly the majority against moves into the hundreds.
Comments
Ayes 273
Noes 276
Boles:
Ayes 261
Noes 282
Kyle:
Ayes 280
Noes 292
Cherry:
Ayes 191
Noes 292
I've lost £10 but it has been 100% worth it
Nothing. Has. Changed.
Next time it should be No No, ending in a decisive No.
#DRAX
You are using utterly irrelevant arguments to try and obfuscate after your basic figures were found to be false.
Surprised that CU was defeated.
Take out the Cabinet votes for the WA and all four of them are more popular.
Motion C : Customs Union (Clarke) For 276 against 273
Motion
Motion E: Confirmatory Public Vote (Kyle/Wilson) For 280 Against 292
Motion G: Parliamentary Supremacy (Cherry) For 191 Against 292
So no Motion again gets a majority but Customs Union again closest and none gets more than May's Deal, she may bring back her Deal again but Letwin now likely to try and switch to preference voting on Wednesday.
Is that actually true? I think the EU would agree, in the circumstances - but not sure it *has* agreed?
https://twitter.com/cgwOMT/status/1112824904989270017
mmm.
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1112824996873822209
Probably won't make a jot of difference, but good to see him take a stand.