Why on earth would we want to give the French our scallops. We should be eating the tasty things ourselves!
Thanks for this post, because it exposes a key issue: price elasticity of demand.
Right now, we sell (a portion of our) scallops abroad, because that's where our fishermen get the highest price. Could we sell them all in the UK? Absolutely. But it wouldn't be at the current price. What's the market clearing price in the UK? I don't know, but I'd guess it'd probably 25-40% below the current level. That would be a pretty horrendous hit to the incomes of fishermen.
In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise.
But in the short-term, the effect would be that fishermen would have to accept a much lower price for their catch. And, of course, the UK would see lower export income. Which would push the pound lower, and increase the cost of fuel and electricity for UK households.
Only one poll etc etc, but people really do forget sometimes that as much we deride the Baker types, they're not wrong when they say a lot of people support what they are seeking. As many as they often say on everything? Different matter. Would it still be a good choice? Another matter.
After my thoughts were slapped down by some numpty who seemed convinced the WA with a CU would clear the Commons on Monday, I did a little more thinking.
The key document for the EU is the WA - the Political Declaration is what comes after so at the moment too many people are putting the cart before the horse. We "could" have a national referendum/election on the various PD options and there may be something to be said for that but at the moment the WA is all that matters.
I don't see why anything that has happened in the past 72 hours makes getting the WA through the Commons any easier. The DUP and the ERG diehards will still be opposed and while the May apologists continue to "report" Labour MPs are apparently willing to rebel and back the WA until we see them in the correct lobby it will be all just talk.
Without a WA it's either leaving on 12/4 or seeking a further extension and I'm far from convinced the mood of the Conservative Party is favourably disposed toward a long extension. Obviously, there are those who back the PM or leader in all instances but I get a sense there is growing anger at what has happened and what might yet happen.
No, most of the Conservative Party is not favourably disposed toward a long extension. But the Conservative Party is no longer in control of events. Parliament and the EU have taken back control and they will resolve the extension issue.
The WA is the worst of all options, held to ransom by EU as they shaft England on the trade deal, Gibraltar sacrificed, fishing gone , etc etc or else a permanent limbo paying them fortunes with no say on anything.
No deal critics have no faith that any wrinkles couldn't be ironed out in a few days, weeks.
As the yougov poll shows - the public are ready to lance the boil - a few days of pain is worth it to get this crap done.
Like ripping off a bandage.
The no deal opponents are spouting the same old 'boy who cried wolf' crap we've heard for years now about the dangers if we were to leave the EU/have a referendum/rule out the Euro/not be founder members of the Euro/leave the ERM etc . . . every time its "ah but this time there really is a wolf".
So how many deaths do you think are acceptable in pursuit of your mad obsession?
How much taxpayers money should be spent converting manual railway crossings to automatic ones?
Let's start with not taking new steps to put people in harm's way and then we can move onto questions of taking people out of harm's way.
The exuberance with which your fellow Leavers are willing to play ducks and drakes with peoples' lives and health is depraved.
The extent to which you Remainers are willing to play on the unfounded fears of the weak and vulnerable is sick.
Calling something unfounded does not make it unfounded.
This, by the way, is not the most stomach-churning phase of the process. That will come if no deal Brexit happens and there are deaths, job losses and disruption. Then the Leavers who are airily opining about the merits of ripping off bandages now and who angrily claimed there were no risks will sagely tell us that yes, that was unfortunate, but it was all worth it.
That's the point when stomachs will be really churning.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
During the referendum campaign, I don't remember anyone saying either that the result was only advisory, or that MPs would have the chance to prevent us leaving after Article 50 was invoked.
Did they?
Yes. This was in comparison to the AV referendum in 2011 which explicitly was binding.
Oh right, who said so during the campaign?
Cameron was pretty clear the result would be implemented
Despite previous experience most people take a promise from a PM at face value
While that's true, the summary on the Houses of Parliament page - that was posted here at the time - had in its first or second sentence that it was advisory.
And the reason it had to be advisory is because there was no defined exit that we were going to. In the case of Alternative Vote, there was a defined and already legislated, alternative that would be put in place immediately.
It therefore worked in the interest of both Leave (because they could offer the widest possible range of Leaves so as to get both me and archer101au in the same tent), and Remain (because it meant that there was always the possibility of overturning a loss.)
... In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise. ...
Or alternatively the industry would hugely contract, which is more likely I think.
In any case the real issue is a (relatively) short-term one (months). In the event of no deal, the news is going to be stuffed full of horror stories about businesses going bust, supplies being disrupted, jobs being lost, etc etc. Some of these will even be true and will indeed be the direct result of Brexit. The idea that this can simply be shrugged off is for the birds.
Why on earth would we want to give the French our scallops. We should be eating the tasty things ourselves!
Thanks for this post, because it exposes a key issue: price elasticity of demand.
Right now, we sell (a portion of our) scallops abroad, because that's where our fishermen get the highest price. Could we sell them all in the UK? Absolutely. But it wouldn't be at the current price. What's the market clearing price in the UK? I don't know, but I'd guess it'd probably 25-40% below the current level. That would be a pretty horrendous hit to the incomes of fishermen.
In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise.
But in the short-term, the effect would be that fishermen would have to accept a much lower price for their catch. And, of course, the UK would see lower export income. Which would push the pound lower, and increase the cost of fuel and electricity for UK households.
Scallop rakes are very environmentally damaging. One positive of no deal is that the poor blighters can live in peace.
Inclined to agree. I've posted before that as a former LD I feel ashamed of some of the things the Coalition did, notably in Health, Legal Aid and Education. I can get over actions being forced of Governments, but what was done to legal Aid and in Welfare is, to me, unforgivable.
Without wishing to rake over the coals too much on this, we did a "deal with the Devil" (as we would have done had we sided with Labour) and our spoon wasn't long enough.
Put it another way, in order to get some of the things through which would never have got through otherwise, we were forced to acquiesce to Conservative legislation that we would under other circumstances have strongly opposed.
I've spent too long wondering what else we could and should have done in 2010 - there are plenty of answers with the gift of hindsight but, at the time, with huge pressure because of events in Europe, there seemed no other choice than to work with the Conservatives who were by some way the leading party.
Anecdotally, Hague thought he had killed us off on the Monday after the GE - he was right. I think we agreed to too much too quickly under pressure - the world wouldn't have ended if we had not had a Government for 10-14 days - I mean it's not as thought we have a functioning Government now and life seems to be going on perfectly normally.
I do recall a degree of panic on the markets if a Government didn't appear quickly. To be fair, Brown hung about a long time, too. The worst thing done, in retrospect was for Clegg to accept the office of DPM without a Department.
Only one poll etc etc, but people really do forget sometimes that as much we deride the Baker types, they're not wrong when they say a lot of people support what they are seeking. As many as they often say on everything? Different matter. Would it still be a good choice? Another matter.
One thing worth noting about that poll: yet again Remainers have needed to be heavily downweighted and Leavers heavily upweighted. We should seriously consider whether false recall is skewing the results.
No deal critics have no faith that any wrinkles couldn't be ironed out in a few days, weeks.
As the yougov poll shows - the public are ready to lance the boil - a few days of pain is worth it to get this crap done.
Like ripping off a bandage.
The no deal opponents are spouting the same old 'boy who cried wolf' crap we've heard for years now about the dangers if we were to leave the EU/have a referendum/rule out the Euro/not be founder members of the Euro/leave the ERM etc . . . every time its "ah but this time there really is a wolf".
So how many deaths do you think are acceptable in pursuit of your mad obsession?
How much taxpayers money should be spent converting manual railway crossings to automatic ones?
Let's start with not taking new steps to put people in harm's way and then we can move onto questions of taking people out of harm's way.
The exuberance with which your fellow Leavers are willing to play ducks and drakes with peoples' lives and health is depraved.
It’s with sadness not exuberance. In a sensible world a deal would have been agreed. Too many politicians decided to grandstand in the U.K., the EU and on both sides of the argument
And your response to that is not to seek delay but instead to say we should leave with no deal? Why?
Earliest legal date for GE now 23rd May - ie after the Brexit deadline.
Parliament would have to dissolve on Monday for GE on 16th May and that is now impossible as no motion laid today (and can't be tomorrow as not sitting).
Until that is they get it and find out it wasn't Project Fear at all.
It would be funny if its wasn't the gravest crisis since 1940.
Its only a crisis in your own fevered imaginations.
In the real world we have the economy ticking over quite nicely. Deficit coming down, economy growing, record employment, inflation at target levels, wages outstripping inflation.
In my ward there are 3LAB inc me 3LD 3CON 2UKIP(Make BREXIT Happen) 2IND
I would forecast 1LD and 2 UKIP or 1LD 1UKIP 1LAB (Not me)
Last time was
LDM 975 32.7% Lab 853 28.6% UKIP 795 26.7% Lab 708 Lab 700 UKIP 660 UKIP 634 LDM 517 LDM 499 Con 266 8.9% MrsRowley Con 245 Con 243
My ward has 3 cons, 3 lab, 1 green, a UKIP make Brexit happen and an independent (a deselected Tory from a few years ago). Should be three Conservative wins (one me), it’s a new ward which has some rural hinterland added to the old.
My wife has 3 lab, 3 cons, 1 green, 1 UKIP make Brexit happen, and an independent. Notionally labour, so wife could retain her new seat on again new boundaries.
Parliament would have to dissolve on Monday for GE on 16th May and that is now impossible as no motion laid today (and can't be tomorrow as not sitting).
Can't be the week after as I have a chess tournament that takes priority
I wish I could believe that. Absent her giving in on customs union and him not demanding a referendum I don’t see how that happens, and Corbyn doesn’t have the party backing for that I suspect.
I fear it is just a sign may was not serious after all and is once again stringing things out.
I have little hope for a joint May/Corbyn position. I just cannot see it.
In fact, my personal mood (for want of a better word) on Brexit is changing. Up to the last couple of days I have seen all of this as a boon. A fascinating puzzle to be grappled with, a great betting opportunity, a compelling drama to be followed, but with the cosy underlying assumption that, ultimately, and no doubt at the very last gasp, we would ratify the Withdrawal Agreement, leave into transition, and then proceed to negotiate a pragmatic trade deal over the next few years.
Not so sure of that now. Things are starting to look quite bleak and it is not clear where a non-traumatic resolution of this crisis is going to come from. So all of a sudden I'm not enjoying it so much. I've gone a bit Yvette Cooper. I'm worried.
I'm not at all sure that a "non-traumatic resolution" (by which, I assume you mean the Withdrawal Agreement passing with or without extra unilateral declarations and/or a referendum appended to it by the Commons) is possible, either. I take it that no sitting his been arranged for Friday, so that leaves MPs with precisely two days to come up with some coherent plan, that can command a settled majority, to be presented to the European Council on the 10th. Where is this meant to come from?
I've been at work where I don't have a lot of spare time to pore over the latest news, but I did hear some ridiculous suggestion to the effect that Theresa May will go to Brussels and ask the other leaders for an extension simply to keep on fruitlessly talking to Corbyn. What follows then depends on the response of the EU27. If they behave as they have done throughout this entire process and stick to their agreed line then, given that she will have presented them with no concrete proposal to justify an extension, they'll tell her to sod off - and then MPs will have to decide whether to just go with No Deal, or to attempt to Revoke. I would've assumed they'd hold a vote and (probably) opt for the latter. But, frankly, at this stage of the debacle one would be unwise to definitively rule out anything that's still possible, from Hard Brexit to MV4 passing to a two-year extension being agreed. Nobody has a clue how this is all going to turn out.
No deal critics have no faith that any wrinkles couldn't be ironed out in a few days, weeks.
As the yougov poll shows - the public are ready to lance the boil - a few days of pain is worth it to get this crap done.
Like ripping off a bandage.
The no deal opponents are spouting the same old 'boy who cried wolf' crap we've heard for years now about the dangers if we were to leave the EU/have a referendum/rule out the Euro/not be founder members of the Euro/leave the ERM etc . . . every time its "ah but this time there really is a wolf".
So how many deaths do you think are acceptable in pursuit of your mad obsession?
How much taxpayers money should be spent converting manual railway crossings to automatic ones?
Let's start with not taking new steps to put people in harm's way and then we can move onto questions of taking people out of harm's way.
The exuberance with which your fellow Leavers are willing to play ducks and drakes with peoples' lives and health is depraved.
It’s with sadness not exuberance. In a sensible world a deal would have been agreed. Too many politicians decided to grandstand in the U.K., the EU and on both sides of the argument
And your response to that is not to seek delay but instead to say we should leave with no deal? Why?
Because if a deal was to be agreeable it would have been agreed by now. The EU are refusing to compromise so we should say goodbye and depart. With regret they're not offering us a deal we can accept so it is time to rip off the bandage and end all the uncertainty. Step forward and tackles any issues no deal brings head on.
And if the EU decides they want a deal afterall without requiring a backstop we should hold the door open to them.
If a 2nd Ref has a proper Leave vs Remain i think it will result in a more decisive Leave result.
I would definitely still be Leave
"Vote remain for years, decades more of this crap , brought to you by dithering politicos who promised to follow your instructions last time and we will stay in this sh1tty club that no one can defend other than "its hard to leave if you are useless"."
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
I wish I could believe that. Absent her giving in on customs union and him not demanding a referendum I don’t see how that happens, and Corbyn doesn’t have the party backing for that I suspect.
I fear it is just a sign may was not serious after all and is once again stringing things out.
I have little hope for a joint May/Corbyn position. I just cannot see it.
In fact, my personal mood (for want of a better word) on Brexit is changing. Up to the last couple of days I have seen all of this as a boon. A fascinating puzzle to be grappled with, a great betting opportunity, a compelling drama to be followed, but with the cosy underlying assumption that, ultimately, and no doubt at the very last gasp, we would ratify the Withdrawal Agreement, leave into transition, and then proceed to negotiate a pragmatic trade deal over the next few years.
Not so sure of that now. Things are starting to look quite bleak and it is not clear where a non-traumatic resolution of this crisis is going to come from. So all of a sudden I'm not enjoying it so much. I've gone a bit Yvette Cooper. I'm worried.
I'
I've been at work where I don't have a lot of spare time to pore over the latest news, but I did hear some ridiculous suggestion to the effect that Theresa May will go to Brussels and ask the other leaders for an extension simply to keep on fruitlessly talking to Corbyn. What follows then depends on the response of the EU27.
It does, but while they are more prepared than us they don't seem to want no deal either, so so long as May and Corbyn keep a straight face the EU leaders might well pretend to believe them.
No deal critics have no faith that any wrinkles couldn't be ironed out in a few days, weeks.
As the yougov poll shows - the public are ready to lance the boil - a few days of pain is worth it to get this crap done.
Like ripping off a bandage.
The no deal opponents are spouting the same old 'boy who cried wolf' crap we've heard for years now about the dangers if we were to leave the EU/have a referendum/rule out the Euro/not be founder members of the Euro/leave the ERM etc . . . every time its "ah but this time there really is a wolf".
So how many deaths do you think are acceptable in pursuit of your mad obsession?
How much taxpayers money should be spent converting manual railway crossings to automatic ones?
Let's start with not taking new steps to put people in harm's way and then we can move onto questions of taking people out of harm's way.
The exuberance with which your fellow Leavers are willing to play ducks and drakes with peoples' lives and health is depraved.
It’s with sadness not exuberance. In a sensible world a deal would have been agreed. Too many politicians decided to grandstand in the U.K., the EU and on both sides of the argument
And your response to that is not to seek delay but instead to say we should leave with no deal? Why?
Because the EU has said they will not negotiate further.
So there is no point in prolonging the uncertainty. My preference would be to sign the deal but I’m not an MP.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Remainers seem to have fallen hook, line and sinker for the fake news of this being a crisis.
If a 2nd Ref has a proper Leave vs Remain i think it will result in a more decisive Leave result.
I would definitely still be Leave
If this trend is confirmed in weekend polling I think we'll hear far less about "People's Votes" and Remainers will very quickly swing behind Theresa May's WA as the least worst option...
Inclined to agree. I've posted before that as a former LD I feel ashamed of some of the things the Coalition did, notably in Health, Legal Aid and Education. I can get over actions being forced of Governments, but what was done to legal Aid and in Welfare is, to me, unforgivable.
...
I've spent too long wondering what else we could and should have done in 2010...
I mean, I'm not a LibDem, but it seems pretty simple to me (and did at the time):
- Not gone for the AV referendum (once the Tories ruled out any form of electoral reform you wanted, you should have just taken it off the table) - Not agreed to vote for increasing tuition fees, as the quid pro quo for giving ground on electoral reform (above) - Not reneged on the promise to vote through the boundary changes (admittedly this wasn't in 2010), which would have netted you HoL reform - Been more proactive in claiming policy wins - the only thing I did feel sorry for you on was Osborne's gleeful theft of the "lifting the low paid out of income tax" agenda, which was good policy, but certainly wasn't his idea.
It does, but while they are more prepared than us they don't seem to want no deal either, so so long as May and Corbyn keep a straight face the EU leaders might well pretend to believe them.
The EU27 won't budge on the European elections issue, though, which would mean that unless the WA is going to get ratified in the next few days, the only way to avoid a crash-out is a long extension and holding the European elections. That in turn would be extremely difficult for Theresa May.
... In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise. ...
Or alternatively the industry would hugely contract, which is more likely I think.
In any case the real issue is a (relatively) short-term one (months). In the event of no deal, the news is going to be stuffed full of horror stories about businesses going bust, supplies being disrupted, jobs being lost, etc etc. Some of these will even be true and will indeed be the direct result of Brexit. The idea that this can simply be shrugged off is for the birds.
Like Black Wednesday, even if temporary it would poison voters against the Tories for years to come. And in this case there is likely also to be longer term progressive and insidious damage as well.
If a 2nd Ref has a proper Leave vs Remain i think it will result in a more decisive Leave result.
I would definitely still be Leave
"Vote remain for years, decades more of this crap , brought to you by dithering politicos who promised to follow your instructions last time and we will stay in this sh1tty club that no one can defend other than "its hard to leave if you are useless"."
#winning
I think Leave supporters should get out more. Brexit is the new opiate of the masses. It prevents you all from seeing the massive problems with our own constitution which are laid bare by this whole fiasco, but you still keep moaning "Brexit, Brexit" as you froth and roll your eyes in a delirium of self induced outrage . The EU is a model of democratic virtue compared with our own system. We are complaining about the speck in the EU eye while unable to notice the beam in our own. It is pathetic and unedifying.
Inclined to agree. I've posted before that as a former LD I feel ashamed of some of the things the Coalition did, notably in Health, Legal Aid and Education. I can get over actions being forced of Governments, but what was done to legal Aid and in Welfare is, to me, unforgivable.
...
I've spent too long wondering what else we could and should have done in 2010...
I mean, I'm not a LibDem, but it seems pretty simple to me (and did at the time):
- Not gone for the AV referendum (once the Tories ruled out any form of electoral reform you wanted, you should have just taken it off the table) - Not agreed to vote for increasing tuition fees, as the quid pro quo for giving ground on electoral reform (above) - Not reneged on the promise to vote through the boundary changes (admittedly this wasn't in 2010), which would have netted you HoL reform - Been more proactive in claiming policy wins - the only thing I did feel sorry for you on was Osborne's gleeful theft of the "lifting the low paid out of income tax" agenda, which was good policy, but certainly wasn't his idea.
I think they should have “owned” certain ministries as well rather than having a seat in every department. That way they could have claimed responsibility for the stuff they did and blamed the Tories for the stuff they didn’t
... In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise. ...
Or alternatively the industry would hugely contract, which is more likely I think.
In any case the real issue is a (relatively) short-term one (months). In the event of no deal, the news is going to be stuffed full of horror stories about businesses going bust, supplies being disrupted, jobs being lost, etc etc. Some of these will even be true and will indeed be the direct result of Brexit. The idea that this can simply be shrugged off is for the birds.
Well yes, that's also a possibility.
I think history will treat the Conservatives who did not vote for the WA very harshly.
I suggest you read the comments of your fellow Leavers on this thread. There's plenty of exuberance around for the death cult.
There is a view in some quarters that No Deal would be the best outcome from here - because it is the only surefire way to force feed reality to the fantasists.
... In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise. ...
Or alternatively the industry would hugely contract, which is more likely I think.
In any case the real issue is a (relatively) short-term one (months). In the event of no deal, the news is going to be stuffed full of horror stories about businesses going bust, supplies being disrupted, jobs being lost, etc etc. Some of these will even be true and will indeed be the direct result of Brexit. The idea that this can simply be shrugged off is for the birds.
Like Black Wednesday, even if temporary it would poison voters against the Tories for years to come. And in this case there is likely also to be longer term progressive and insidious damage as well.
Yep. And all the people now saying No Deal is Project Fear will switch to saying that it was the wrong sort of No Deal - we should have shouted louder and gone for a full British No Deal under a true Leaver rather than this kind of milquetoast Remainer-polluted No Deal.
If a 2nd Ref has a proper Leave vs Remain i think it will result in a more decisive Leave result.
I would definitely still be Leave
If this trend is confirmed in weekend polling I think we'll hear far less about "People's Votes" and Remainers will very quickly swing behind Theresa May's WA as the least worst option...
Very few people will change their minds. It’s whether the abstainers now turn out or new voters swing one way that could change the result.
It’s a bit soon for anyone to get excited by this poll. The question asked was which of two options should happen if there was no extension. So people are being forced to choose between prolonging the political agony or risking economic agony. The risk of economic agony appears to have the narrowest of edges. No deal is still a minority sport in other YouGov polling.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Remainers seem to have fallen hook, line and sinker for the fake news of this being a crisis.
If you don't think this is a crisis you can only be described as a fool or an ostrich or both.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Alternatively people who have lived for many years out in the real world, worked for years if not decades, got married, had kids, run or owned a house etc may arguably be more informed about the realities of life than those who have just been to uni and spend their time on social media.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Remainers seem to have fallen hook, line and sinker for the fake news of this being a crisis.
I wish I could believe that. Absent her giving in on customs union and him not demanding a referendum I don’t see how that happens, and Corbyn doesn’t have the party backing for that I suspect.
I fear it is just a sign may was not serious after all and is once again stringing things out.
I have little hope for a joint May/Corbyn position. I just cannot see it.
In fact, my personal mood (for want of a better word) on Brexit is changing. Up to the last couple of days I have seen all of this as a boon. A fascinating puzzle to be grappled with, a great betting opportunity, a compelling drama to be followed, but with the cosy underlying assumption that, ultimately, and no doubt at the very last gasp, we would ratify the Withdrawal Agreement, leave into transition, and then proceed to negotiate a pragmatic trade deal over the next few years.
Not so sure of that now. Things are starting to look quite bleak and it is not clear where a non-traumatic resolution of this crisis is going to come from. So all of a sudden I'm not enjoying it so much. I've gone a bit Yvette Cooper. I'm worried.
I've been at work where I don't have a lot of spare time to pore over the latest news, but I did hear some ridiculous suggestion to the effect that Theresa May will go to Brussels and ask the other leaders for an extension simply to keep on fruitlessly talking to Corbyn. What follows then depends on the response of the EU27.
It does, but while they are more prepared than us they don't seem to want no deal either, so so long as May and Corbyn keep a straight face the EU leaders might well pretend to believe them.
An awful lot seems to be predicated on this notion that the EU will continue to indulge the UK forever, because it is terrified of No Deal. I'm not sure that this is entirely true.
Of course, in the unlikely event that they buy this rubbish, they're bound to insist on a lengthy extension this time. They need to settle the issue of the European Parliament elections: if they allow a situation to develop in which we do not participate yet retain a right to Revoke, then if Revocation did subsequently occur it would muck up the EU's entire political/legal order.
Only one poll etc etc, but people really do forget sometimes that as much we deride the Baker types, they're not wrong when they say a lot of people support what they are seeking. As many as they often say on everything? Different matter. Would it still be a good choice? Another matter.
One thing worth noting about that poll: yet again Remainers have needed to be heavily downweighted and Leavers heavily upweighted. We should seriously consider whether false recall is skewing the results.
That's certainly possible, but then the petition would suggest that Remain supporters are more motivated to click on things online in support of their view. So it's impossible to tell either way without holding another referendum, which if it had no deal on the ballot paper would make it really hard to negotiate at all with the EU in future were that option to win.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Alternatively people who have lived for many years out in the real world, worked for years if not decades, got married, had kids, run or owned a house etc may arguably be more informed about the realities of life than those who have just been to uni and spend their time on social media.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
Beware of extrapolation from small datasets.
And there's no smaller dataset than your own life experience.
No deal critics have no faith that any wrinkles couldn't be ironed out in a few days, weeks.
As the yougov poll shows - the public are ready to lance the boil - a few days of pain is worth it to get this crap done.
Like ripping off a bandage.
The no deal opponents are spouting the same old 'boy who cried wolf' crap we've heard for years now about the dangers if we were to leave the EU/have a referendum/rule out the Euro/not be founder members of the Euro/leave the ERM etc . . . every time its "ah but this time there really is a wolf".
What happened at the end of that particular fable?
It does, but while they are more prepared than us they don't seem to want no deal either, so so long as May and Corbyn keep a straight face the EU leaders might well pretend to believe them.
The EU27 won't budge on the European elections issue, though, which would mean that unless the WA is going to get ratified in the next few days, the only way to avoid a crash-out is a long extension and holding the European elections. That in turn would be extremely difficult for Theresa May.
It will be terminal for Theresa May. But that seems to be where we're headed. By this time next week we will probably have a long extension, imminent EU elections and a vacancy for the position of Tory leader.
I suggest you read the comments of your fellow Leavers on this thread. There's plenty of exuberance around for the death cult.
There is a view in some quarters that No Deal would be the best outcome from here - because it is the only surefire way to force feed reality to the fantasists.
Any sympathy with that at all?
No. No, in fact for two reasons.
First, No Deal Brexit is not worth harming anyone. Even if the damage could be confined to hardcore Leavers (which it couldn't), I would not wish them any harm.
Secondly, the fantasists will decide either that the harm did not happen or that the harm was unrelated to Brexit or that the harm was caused by the hamfisted implementation of No Deal Brexit. They would never accept that No Deal was innately flawed.
Death cultists seek only greater perfection for their mortal desire.
No deal critics have no faith that any wrinkles couldn't be ironed out in a few days, weeks.
As the yougov poll shows - the public are ready to lance the boil - a few days of pain is worth it to get this crap done.
Like ripping off a bandage.
The no deal opponents are spouting the same old 'boy who cried wolf' crap we've heard for years now about the dangers if we were to leave the EU/have a referendum/rule out the Euro/not be founder members of the Euro/leave the ERM etc . . . every time its "ah but this time there really is a wolf".
What happened at the end of that particular fable?
The boy got eaten because he had lied too often. In Brexit terms it means a no deal disaster would be the doomongers fault for flooding us with doom predictions
It does, but while they are more prepared than us they don't seem to want no deal either, so so long as May and Corbyn keep a straight face the EU leaders might well pretend to believe them.
The EU27 won't budge on the European elections issue, though, which would mean that unless the WA is going to get ratified in the next few days, the only way to avoid a crash-out is a long extension and holding the European elections. That in turn would be extremely difficult for Theresa May.
It will be terminal for Theresa May. But that seems to be where we're headed. By this time next week we will probably have a long extension, imminent EU elections and a vacancy for the position of Tory leader.
May has managed to make herself simultaneously politically dead and very hard to remove. That gives her a lot of scope to survive the unsurvivable.
If a 2nd Ref has a proper Leave vs Remain i think it will result in a more decisive Leave result.
I would definitely still be Leave
If this trend is confirmed in weekend polling I think we'll hear far less about "People's Votes" and Remainers will very quickly swing behind Theresa May's WA as the least worst option...
Very few people will change their minds. It’s whether the abstainers now turn out or new voters swing one way that could change the result.
I'm really talking about Remainers in Parliament shifting. There's a lot of them who have been voting against everything as they're hankering after PV and hard Remain.
If opinion is shifting decisively across the country to No Deal then the Vince Cables and Anna Soubry's will have to move to Theresa's deal (with or without CU) as at least it offers some on-going relationship with the EU.
I imagine that there will be about 180 in the end, with hundreds more not facing major party opposition. Granted, these are rural wards, but it's still a piss poor effort from Labour and Lib Dems.
There are, I think, nearly 9,500 seats up for grabs on 2/5 so the fact the Conservatives are unopposed in just over 1% of them (have you bothered counting how many Labour Councillors are guaranteed to be returned?) is hardly news.
How does this compare with 2015 would be a better guide - presumably then there were more UKIP candidates fighting Conservatives.
I doubt Labour and the LDs have ever been able to put up full slates for the English rural elections - describing it as "piss poor" seems rather mean-spirited and petty.
This might on the other hand be a good election to be an Independent (they won 500 seats last time). I'll be keeping an eye on Tandridge where the Independents might make more gains from the Conservatives while in Guildford a new independent group is contesting a number of the seats.
I'm a bit surprised to see that the LibDems are not fielding candidates in quite a lot of the wards - they used to be quite strong here.
I spotted the head boy from my year at school as candidate for the Conservatives. He used to stand for the Lib Dems. I have literally not spoken to him since we were at school in the 70s so I have no idea what journey he has been on politically. But I am guessing at least some Lib Dem activists must have migrated to the Conservatives along with their former voters.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Alternatively people who have lived for many years out in the real world, worked for years if not decades, got married, had kids, run or owned a house etc may arguably be more informed about the realities of life than those who have just been to uni and spend their time on social media.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
Older people may not care about Europe because they have never worked outside of the country they live in (heck many won't have worked outside the town they were born in).
Younger people may appreciate the opportunities that Freedom of Movement offers them even if they were never to use them.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Alternatively people who have lived for many years out in the real world, worked for years if not decades, got married, had kids, run or owned a house etc may arguably be more informed about the realities of life than those who have just been to uni and spend their time on social media.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
Na, ask what many of them think of Europe and they talk about straight bananas. Next obsession is Princess Diana. Yep they actually think the myths and lies they read in the Express are more important than having a vibrant functioning economy. Brexit really is the opiate of the masses
... In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise. ...
Or alternatively the industry would hugely contract, which is more likely I think.
In any case the real issue is a (relatively) short-term one (months). In the event of no deal, the news is going to be stuffed full of horror stories about businesses going bust, supplies being disrupted, jobs being lost, etc etc. Some of these will even be true and will indeed be the direct result of Brexit. The idea that this can simply be shrugged off is for the birds.
Like Black Wednesday, even if temporary it would poison voters against the Tories for years to come. And in this case there is likely also to be longer term progressive and insidious damage as well.
Yep. And all the people now saying No Deal is Project Fear will switch to saying that it was the wrong sort of No Deal - we should have shouted louder and gone for a full British No Deal under a true Leaver rather than this kind of milquetoast Remainer-polluted No Deal.
Most likely they will just disappear and the politicians advocating it will find that their support has mysteriously melted away
It does, but while they are more prepared than us they don't seem to want no deal either, so so long as May and Corbyn keep a straight face the EU leaders might well pretend to believe them.
The EU27 won't budge on the European elections issue, though, which would mean that unless the WA is going to get ratified in the next few days, the only way to avoid a crash-out is a long extension and holding the European elections. That in turn would be extremely difficult for Theresa May.
It will be terminal for Theresa May. But that seems to be where we're headed. By this time next week we will probably have a long extension, imminent EU elections and a vacancy for the position of Tory leader.
As I commented earlier today, there are no nice options left for the Tory party. The only question really left is how, when and why will they split....
In my ward there are 3LAB inc me 3LD 3CON 2UKIP(Make BREXIT Happen) 2IND
I would forecast 1LD and 2 UKIP or 1LD 1UKIP 1LAB (Not me)
Last time was
LDM 975 32.7% Lab 853 28.6% UKIP 795 26.7% Lab 708 Lab 700 UKIP 660 UKIP 634 LDM 517 LDM 499 Con 266 8.9% MrsRowley Con 245 Con 243
Best of luck to you. And to anyone else putting themselves forward, regardless of what party you are representing. If it weren't for people like you the rest of us would have nobody to vote for and the life of the nation would be much the poorer.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
The same poll being lauded by Leavers also shows the following
No deal bad outcome 50%
Good outcome 25%
Compromise 13%
I am not sure whether it is their Brexit delirium that makes them want to believe everyone is a headbanger, or all the years of reading the Daily Express that has rotted their cognitive function, or both. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Alternatively people who have lived for many years out in the real world, worked for years if not decades, got married, had kids, run or owned a house etc may arguably be more informed about the realities of life than those who have just been to uni and spend their time on social media.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
Beware of extrapolation from small datasets.
And there's no smaller dataset than your own life experience.
Really? I thought mine was entirely representative of the average joe.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
Doesn't matter. They don't have a way around this. If they're going to allow us to dither/renegotiate/whatever, the UK MUST elect MEPs. They can't create a situation in which we are still in the EU as full members, but don't have any MEPs. This would be illegal.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Alternatively people who have lived for many years out in the real world, worked for years if not decades, got married, had kids, run or owned a house etc may arguably be more informed about the realities of life than those who have just been to uni and spend their time on social media.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
Na, ask what many of them think of Europe and they talk about straight bananas. Next obsession is Princess Diana. Yep they actually think the myths and lies they read in the Express are more important than having a vibrant functioning economy. Brexit really is the opiate of the masses
I literally don't know anyone who thinks the EU is interested in straight bananas. You are consumed by your own prejudices just as much as extreme Brexiteers.
Inclined to agree. I've posted before that as a former LD I feel ashamed of some of the things the Coalition did, notably in Health, Legal Aid and Education. I can get over actions being forced of Governments, but what was done to legal Aid and in Welfare is, to me, unforgivable.
...
I've spent too long wondering what else we could and should have done in 2010...
I mean, I'm not a LibDem, but it seems pretty simple to me (and did at the time):
- Not gone for the AV referendum (once the Tories ruled out any form of electoral reform you wanted, you should have just taken it off the table) - Not agreed to vote for increasing tuition fees, as the quid pro quo for giving ground on electoral reform (above) - Not reneged on the promise to vote through the boundary changes (admittedly this wasn't in 2010), which would have netted you HoL reform - Been more proactive in claiming policy wins - the only thing I did feel sorry for you on was Osborne's gleeful theft of the "lifting the low paid out of income tax" agenda, which was good policy, but certainly wasn't his idea.
They should have gone with STV for local government, having the advantages of not needing a referendum and harmonising E&W with Scotland and NI. They should have simply refused to back the tuition fees increase and held to their promise, as the Tories did over the even more expensive pensioner benefits. The boundary changes they should never have agreed in the first place - fewer seats and the tighter criteria would have wiped the LibDems out, worse even than their actual fate. And taken a tougher line generally with business - as the Tories' internal opposition is doing currently.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
Doesn't matter. They don't have a way around this. If they're going to allow us to dither/renegotiate/whatever, the UK MUST elect MEPs. They can't create a situation in which we are still in the EU as full members, but don't have any MEPs. This would be illegal.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
I'm amazed that Cons haven't ruled out fielding candidates whether the elections happen or not - absolutely no upside to participation.
I'm not at all sure that a "non-traumatic resolution" (by which, I assume you mean the Withdrawal Agreement passing with or without extra unilateral declarations and/or a referendum appended to it by the Commons) is possible, either. I take it that no sitting his been arranged for Friday, so that leaves MPs with precisely two days to come up with some coherent plan, that can command a settled majority, to be presented to the European Council on the 10th. Where is this meant to come from?
I've been at work where I don't have a lot of spare time to pore over the latest news, but I did hear some ridiculous suggestion to the effect that Theresa May will go to Brussels and ask the other leaders for an extension simply to keep on fruitlessly talking to Corbyn. What follows then depends on the response of the EU27. If they behave as they have done throughout this entire process and stick to their agreed line then, given that she will have presented them with no concrete proposal to justify an extension, they'll tell her to sod off - and then MPs will have to decide whether to just go with No Deal, or to attempt to Revoke. I would've assumed they'd hold a vote and (probably) opt for the latter. But, frankly, at this stage of the debacle one would be unwise to definitively rule out anything that's still possible, from Hard Brexit to MV4 passing to a two-year extension being agreed. Nobody has a clue how this is all going to turn out.
By not traumatic I mean avoiding the economic carnage of No Deal, and the wider political carnage of Revoke or a forced Ref2 with no preceding GE mandate. So, yes, passing the WA is what that boils down to. I love predicting but I agree with you that it is becoming pointless.
However, for old times' sake, long extension granted with a break clause for passing the WA before it ends. And a fudge is found so that we do not have to fight the Euros. We continue to faff around. New Tory leader. GE in Oct with Labour offering re-negotiation and Ref2 on the resulting BINO deal. Labour win the election. And I mean win, none of this largest party and govern with the SNP nonsense. They duly re-negotiate and Ref2 happens in 2020. We stay in the EU and nationalize the trains.
The Lords droning on about one procedural amendment after another must be pretty much the most tedious thing it is possible to watch on television, barring cricket.
The Leaver filibusters are very slowly being defeated about 65 v 230 each time.
Varadkar - Merkel press conference is painful to watch as they stonewall the border which would come in on the 13th April. Varadkar had no answer whatsoever
Merkel is the key here with her 'where there is a will there is a way'
It does, but while they are more prepared than us they don't seem to want no deal either, so so long as May and Corbyn keep a straight face the EU leaders might well pretend to believe them.
The EU27 won't budge on the European elections issue, though, which would mean that unless the WA is going to get ratified in the next few days, the only way to avoid a crash-out is a long extension and holding the European elections. That in turn would be extremely difficult for Theresa May.
It will be terminal for Theresa May. But that seems to be where we're headed. By this time next week we will probably have a long extension, imminent EU elections and a vacancy for the position of Tory leader.
As I commented earlier today, there are no nice options left for the Tory party. The only question really left is how, when and why will they split....
I think a split is a real possibility, but it will most likely stay stitched together by the voting system for one, and secondly habit. There will continue to be a battle for the soul of the party in parliament for some time. Labour has papered over the cracks for the time being, but don't forget they are led by a man that lost a vonc in his PLP by a big margin. Strange times indeed
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
Carnage here but why is that their problem? If your point is that they will end up with a lot of rebarbative nutters as UK meps they are used to that.
If only the public were negotiating with the EU......
Looks like an emotional response, it would change pretty quickly if it happened.
A further indication of the weaknesses of our educational system if it is accurate.
An indication of the power exercised by Rothermere, Murdoch and the Barclay bros. for the last ~25 years? Never mind the truth, just tell people via your paper(s) that the EU issues all our laws (it doesn't) and spends all our money (it's ~1%).
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
I can't disagree with that, and it is probably a major factor, particularly when you look at the Leave demographic. It is an age group (including mine own age group) that is most likely to read newspapers, and most likely to believe them. At least younger generations know about fake news
Alternatively people who have lived for many years out in the real world, worked for years if not decades, got married, had kids, run or owned a house etc may arguably be more informed about the realities of life than those who have just been to uni and spend their time on social media.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
The funniest bit of the post-referendum aftermath was the implied insistence of certain Remainers that old people were impatient reactionaries who had no interest in anything but the immediate future because they wouldn't live long enough to see anything else, while people in their early 20s were sober, pragmatic long term planners who had carefully weighed up the likely pros and cons of EU membership throughout the next 60 years and made a rational decision, based on all available evidence, that their lives would be better inside. And therefore the votes of the latter group should count extra. Or something.
Raise the voting age to 30. The Greeks were right all along.
Also people get an extra vote for every child under 30 they are currently supporting to some extent.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
Carnage here but why is that their problem? If your point is that they will end up with a lot of rebarbative nutters as UK meps they are used to that.
Good, I'm voting for the craziest twat I can find on the ballot paper.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
Carnage here but why is that their problem? If your point is that they will end up with a lot of rebarbative nutters as UK meps they are used to that.
Good, I'm voting for the craziest twat I can find on the ballot paper.
I think Nigel Farage will be standing again. Alternatively there will be Tommy Robinson, both of the same cloth.
I'm not at all sure that a "non-traumatic resolution" (by which, I assume you mean the Withdrawal Agreement passing with or without extra unilateral declarations and/or a referendum appended to it by the Commons) is possible, either. I take it that no sitting his been arranged for Friday, so that leaves MPs with precisely two days to come up with some coherent plan, that can command a settled majority, to be presented to the European Council on the 10th. Where is this meant to come from?
I've been at work where I don't have a lot of spare time to pore over the latest news, but I did hear some ridiculous suggestion to the effect that Theresa May will go to Brussels and ask the other leaders for an extension simply to keep on fruitlessly talking to Corbyn. What follows then depends on the response of the EU27. If they behave as they have done throughout this entire process and stick to their agreed line then, given that she will have presented them with no concrete proposal to justify an extension, they'll tell her to sod off - and then MPs will have to decide whether to just go with No Deal, or to attempt to Revoke. I would've assumed they'd hold a vote and (probably) opt for the latter. But, frankly, at this stage of the debacle one would be unwise to definitively rule out anything that's still possible, from Hard Brexit to MV4 passing to a two-year extension being agreed. Nobody has a clue how this is all going to turn out.
By not traumatic I mean avoiding the economic carnage of No Deal, and the wider political carnage of Revoke or a forced Ref2 with no preceding GE mandate. So, yes, passing the WA is what that boils down to. I love predicting but I agree with you that it is becoming pointless.
However, for old times' sake, long extension granted with a break clause for passing the WA before it ends. And a fudge is found so that we do not have to fight the Euros. We continue to faff around. New Tory leader. GE in Oct with Labour offering re-negotiation and Ref2 on the resulting BINO deal. Labour win the election. And I mean win, none of this largest party and govern with the SNP nonsense. They duly re-negotiate and Ref2 happens in 2020. We stay in the EU and nationalize the trains.
No. If we can't come up with any sort of plan then I think they *have* to give up and send May packing. Otherwise, the faffing could continue forever, and they don't want that either. That would presumably lead to a Revoke versus No Deal vote in the Commons on the 11th.
I know that MPs don't want to be forced to make such an onerous decision, but if they can't agree on anything else than eventually they're going to have to do it.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
Carnage here but why is that their problem? If your point is that they will end up with a lot of rebarbative nutters as UK meps they are used to that.
Good, I'm voting for the craziest twat I can find on the ballot paper.
I think Nigel Farage will be standing again. Alternatively there will be Tommy Robinson, both of the same cloth.
Great, Tommy it is then. We don't want the odious tosser here, we can send him to Brussels, with a nice trip to Strasbourg once a month.
The EU would be nuts to force us to have EU elections this close to the chaos that is Westminster at the minute. I know they say that rules is rules and they can't do owt about it, but feck me, it'll be carnage.
Carnage here but why is that their problem? If your point is that they will end up with a lot of rebarbative nutters as UK meps they are used to that.
Good, I'm voting for the craziest twat I can find on the ballot paper.
I think Nigel Farage will be standing again. Alternatively there will be Tommy Robinson, both of the same cloth.
People scaremongering about Tommy Robinson getting elected seem to have forgotten that Nick Griffin was an MEP.
Varadkar - Merkel press conference is painful to watch as they stonewall the border which would come in on the 13th April. Varadkar had no answer whatsoever
Merkel is the key here with her 'where there is a will there is a way'
Merkel doesn't want a border - but is the one threatening to build one.
Comments
Right now, we sell (a portion of our) scallops abroad, because that's where our fishermen get the highest price. Could we sell them all in the UK? Absolutely. But it wouldn't be at the current price. What's the market clearing price in the UK? I don't know, but I'd guess it'd probably 25-40% below the current level. That would be a pretty horrendous hit to the incomes of fishermen.
In the long-run, of course, British chefs, and chippies, and home cooks, and makers of frozen food, would do a better job of using scallops. They'd become a bigger part of the national diet, and the price we were willing to pay in the UK would rise.
But in the short-term, the effect would be that fishermen would have to accept a much lower price for their catch. And, of course, the UK would see lower export income. Which would push the pound lower, and increase the cost of fuel and electricity for UK households.
I would forecast 1LD and 2 UKIP or 1LD 1UKIP 1LAB (Not me)
Last time was
LDM 975 32.7%
Lab 853 28.6%
UKIP 795 26.7%
Lab 708
Lab 700
UKIP 660
UKIP 634
LDM 517
LDM 499
Con 266 8.9%
MrsRowley Con 245
Con 243
This, by the way, is not the most stomach-churning phase of the process. That will come if no deal Brexit happens and there are deaths, job losses and disruption. Then the Leavers who are airily opining about the merits of ripping off bandages now and who angrily claimed there were no risks will sagely tell us that yes, that was unfortunate, but it was all worth it.
That's the point when stomachs will be really churning.
Until that is they get it and find out it wasn't Project Fear at all.
It would be funny if its wasn't the gravest crisis since 1940.
Exception: I think the Times is pro-EU membership and for a while so was the Mail on Sunday.
And the reason it had to be advisory is because there was no defined exit that we were going to. In the case of Alternative Vote, there was a defined and already legislated, alternative that would be put in place immediately.
It therefore worked in the interest of both Leave (because they could offer the widest possible range of Leaves so as to get both me and archer101au in the same tent), and Remain (because it meant that there was always the possibility of overturning a loss.)
In any case the real issue is a (relatively) short-term one (months). In the event of no deal, the news is going to be stuffed full of horror stories about businesses going bust, supplies being disrupted, jobs being lost, etc etc. Some of these will even be true and will indeed be the direct result of Brexit. The idea that this can simply be shrugged off is for the birds.
Brown hung about a long time, too.
The worst thing done, in retrospect was for Clegg to accept the office of DPM without a Department.
Parliament would have to dissolve on Monday for GE on 16th May and that is now impossible as no motion laid today (and can't be tomorrow as not sitting).
That way May can go and get an extension under the guise of we’re moving forward . It might be enough to get an extension with an exit clause.
In the real world we have the economy ticking over quite nicely. Deficit coming down, economy growing, record employment, inflation at target levels, wages outstripping inflation.
Some "crisis".
If a 2nd Ref has a proper Leave vs Remain i think it will result in a more decisive Leave result.
I would definitely still be Leave
My wife has 3 lab, 3 cons, 1 green, 1 UKIP make Brexit happen, and an independent. Notionally labour, so wife could retain her new seat on again new boundaries.
I've been at work where I don't have a lot of spare time to pore over the latest news, but I did hear some ridiculous suggestion to the effect that Theresa May will go to Brussels and ask the other leaders for an extension simply to keep on fruitlessly talking to Corbyn. What follows then depends on the response of the EU27. If they behave as they have done throughout this entire process and stick to their agreed line then, given that she will have presented them with no concrete proposal to justify an extension, they'll tell her to sod off - and then MPs will have to decide whether to just go with No Deal, or to attempt to Revoke. I would've assumed they'd hold a vote and (probably) opt for the latter. But, frankly, at this stage of the debacle one would be unwise to definitively rule out anything that's still possible, from Hard Brexit to MV4 passing to a two-year extension being agreed. Nobody has a clue how this is all going to turn out.
And if the EU decides they want a deal afterall without requiring a backstop we should hold the door open to them.
#winning
So there is no point in prolonging the uncertainty. My preference would be to sign the deal but I’m not an MP.
It will be effective vassal state vs remain - and the 51 per cent preferring no deal on that poll won’t be given that choice.
Parliament is taking back control from the voters and handing it straight back to Brussels!
Only 26 percent want a no deal .
- Not gone for the AV referendum (once the Tories ruled out any form of electoral reform you wanted, you should have just taken it off the table)
- Not agreed to vote for increasing tuition fees, as the quid pro quo for giving ground on electoral reform (above)
- Not reneged on the promise to vote through the boundary changes (admittedly this wasn't in 2010), which would have netted you HoL reform
- Been more proactive in claiming policy wins - the only thing I did feel sorry for you on was Osborne's gleeful theft of the "lifting the low paid out of income tax" agenda, which was good policy, but certainly wasn't his idea.
I think history will treat the Conservatives who did not vote for the WA very harshly.
https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1113823082123337733
Any sympathy with that at all?
It’s a bit soon for anyone to get excited by this poll. The question asked was which of two options should happen if there was no extension. So people are being forced to choose between prolonging the political agony or risking economic agony. The risk of economic agony appears to have the narrowest of edges. No deal is still a minority sport in other YouGov polling.
It’s just a thought that maybe they vote based on life experiences - not what they read in the papers?! And perhaps don’t as well always believe what the powers that be tell them as they have often in their long experience got it wrong!
Of course, in the unlikely event that they buy this rubbish, they're bound to insist on a lengthy extension this time. They need to settle the issue of the European Parliament elections: if they allow a situation to develop in which we do not participate yet retain a right to Revoke, then if Revocation did subsequently occur it would muck up the EU's entire political/legal order.
And there's no smaller dataset than your own life experience.
First, No Deal Brexit is not worth harming anyone. Even if the damage could be confined to hardcore Leavers (which it couldn't), I would not wish them any harm.
Secondly, the fantasists will decide either that the harm did not happen or that the harm was unrelated to Brexit or that the harm was caused by the hamfisted implementation of No Deal Brexit. They would never accept that No Deal was innately flawed.
Death cultists seek only greater perfection for their mortal desire.
No deal bad outcome 50%
Good outcome 25%
Compromise 13%
If opinion is shifting decisively across the country to No Deal then the Vince Cables and Anna Soubry's will have to move to Theresa's deal (with or without CU) as at least it offers some on-going relationship with the EU.
Younger people may appreciate the opportunities that Freedom of Movement offers them even if they were never to use them.
Am hearing that the "Renew" party has been spending a fair bit in Newport? What to make of it I don't know but just had a wild bet of £3.
(EDIT: Renew, that is. Not your good self.)
However, for old times' sake, long extension granted with a break clause for passing the WA before it ends. And a fudge is found so that we do not have to fight the Euros. We continue to faff around. New Tory leader. GE in Oct with Labour offering re-negotiation and Ref2 on the resulting BINO deal. Labour win the election. And I mean win, none of this largest party and govern with the SNP nonsense. They duly re-negotiate and Ref2 happens in 2020. We stay in the EU and nationalize the trains.
The Leaver filibusters are very slowly being defeated about 65 v 230 each time.
https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/17550669.bolton-question-time-cancelled-and-moved-to-london/
Merkel is the key here with her 'where there is a will there is a way'
Raise the voting age to 30. The Greeks were right all along.
Also people get an extra vote for every child under 30 they are currently supporting to some extent.
However, it still isn't a great look to shun Bolton and once again hold Question Time in London.
I know that MPs don't want to be forced to make such an onerous decision, but if they can't agree on anything else than eventually they're going to have to do it.
Looks like it is mainly Barclay and Starmer and their delegations