I find it bemusing that so many Remainers like Mr Meeks are mock shocked and horrified at Julie Hartley-Brewer's comments. When these same people have for years been intoning that Brexit is a risk to the union.
If we put unionism first then Brexit might not be a good idea. If we put Brexit first then the union might not be saved.
No reason why some people's preferences can't and shouldn't be Brexit first.
No reason why you can't also have both, even in Scotland the Brexit Party were second in the European Parliament elections and in Wales the Brexit Party were first just like in England
And even in Scotland, Leave was second in the EU referendum.
On topic, it's important to note that resignation is usually a one-shot event: after you've gone, your influence is roughly zero unless you actually achieve a reshaping of British politics, which is a lot to ask of you as Obscure Backbench MP for Somewhereshire. If you threaten to quit, people anxiously rush round and try to help reassure you. If you actually quit, you're on your own. I used to read what, say, Chuka felt about Labour with interest and some concern, but now he's pushed off, I don't really care.
A second issue is that people with strong views on everything set up litmus tests which they demand you pass, or else you're the enemy. Ultra-Remainers demand that Labour commits not only to a referendum with a Remain option but to endorsing Remain unequivocally. Ultra-Brexiteers demand that you put Brexit ahead of the unity of the UK, or else you're a traitor. Anti-Williamson campaigners demand that MPs sign the letter to suspend him for saying Labour's been too defensive, or otherwise be seen as anti-semites.
Loyalists on all sides recoil from this level of intensity - they don't necessarily see the EU as wholly good or wholly bad, they don't think their party is really Islamophobic or anti-semitic. They don't see any of these things as the decisive make-or-break moments. And so they shake their heads worriedly and soldier on.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be.
As previously noted, your faith in Johnson is entirely based on him being a liar.
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
We have a goods trade deficit of 135 billion. We have a services trade surplus of 92 billion.
Your/Boris's policy is "ideally enhanced access for services" ??
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be
And the DUP will agree to the border in the Irish Sea?
The DUP can be ignored once Boris wins an overall Tory majority
Technical Betting note on Dem Nominee, the whole back side of the book is now sub 99%. You might think it's a open ended contest but the back side includes a couple of % between Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton
Technical Betting note on Dem Nominee, the whole back side of the book is now sub 99%. You might think it's a open ended contest but the back side includes a couple of % between Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton
NB in theory at least there could be new entrants.
As far as I am aware, these are the first two constituency markets to be listed (both Shadsy). Unusually late, considering that the next GE can’t be far off.
It must have been a very niche group of Poles you encountered in Poland. Either that or they were trying to impress you because Polish GDP per capita is less than half what it is in the UK:
Now there's more to economics than GDP, even more to living standards and yet more to quality of life but the likelihood of Poland matching the UK economy is pretty slim in the foreseeable future.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
My fundamental point is that you have misdiagnosed the situation, so I don’t accept the premise of your argument.
They will bitch and moan but not do anything effective. When Brexit happens it will either be not as bad as they think (in which case they will reintegrate into the party) or it is (in which case they or their successors* will be well positioned to lead the party)
* this process can take a while. It was about 30 years before the Tory party successfully repositioned themselves after the Peelite/Ultra split.
My argument is simply that there are two groups, one in each main party, who are appalled by those in control and who now have a choice to make.
I appreciate that you are relaxed about the coalition of strident English nationalism and visceral hatred of the EU that is now in charge of your party. But why should those who think it is catastrophic stay around to be abused by the death cult?
And my point is that they are different. One is a policy disagreement and one is a moral weakness. Policy disagreements can and will be ridden out. It’s far harder to do that with moral disagreements without absorbing a taint.
In any event you may say they shouldn’t stick around. I think they will stick around. And they will be right to do so.
The referendum was won by frightening voters into believing that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain. Since then Leavers have sought to label those who don’t agree with them as quislings, traitors and saboteurs. It’s the politics of deceit and division.
Brexit is a moral weakness too.
We know your views on this. I disagree. There is little point in rerunning the argument.
You are comfortable with whipping up untrue fears of mass immigration to indulge your visceral hatred of the EU. It’s unsurprising we disagree.
No, I’m not.
But if it gives you a warm glow of moral smugness to believe that then go ahead. I care little what you think of me.
You have never disavowed any aspect of how Leavers have conducted yourself. You have no suggestions for how the lies and divisions that Leavers foment should be remedied. You appear to view them as unfortunate necessities.
But apparently Brexit isn’t a moral failing.
You must have missed it then. I’ve repeatedly said I would never vote for a party led by Farage, and that it was Matthew Elliott and Dan Hannan that got me involved in Business for Britain.
I also hosted and financed the launch of the Imitative for Free Trade
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals and no more annual financial contributions to the EU but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
Just because an area voted Leave does not mean it's going to vote for Boris Johnson.
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
We have a goods trade deficit of 135 billion. We have a services trade surplus of 92 billion.
Your/Boris's policy is "ideally enhanced access for services" ??
A Canada style FTA is good for GB manufacturing and will actually help our economy become less London centric and boost the Midlands and North exactly as most Leave voters wanted but London will still remain the financial capital of Europe
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
How long will it take to negotiate?
Less than Canada took as we already have arrangements with the EU anyway
The point of Brexit was the ability to diverge. Given that Brexiteers will veto any form of disputes resolution mechanism akin to that in the Canada deal as a breach of their precious “sovereignty” that idea falls at the first hurdle. There will be no Canada store FTA because, well, we are not Canada and Brexiteers don’t know what’s in the Canada deal anyway.
My argument is simply that there are two groups, one in each main party, who are appalled by those in control and who now have a choice to make.
I appreciate that you are relaxed about the coalition of strident English nationalism and visceral hatred of the EU that is now in charge of your party. But why should those who think it is catastrophic stay around to be abused by the death cult?
And my point is that they are different. One is a policy disagreement and one is a moral weakness. Policy disagreements can and will be ridden out. It’s far harder to do that with moral disagreements without absorbing a taint.
In any event you may say they shouldn’t stick around. I think they will stick around. And they will be right to do so.
The referendum was won by frightening voters into believing that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain. Since then Leavers have sought to label those who don’t agree with them as quislings, traitors and saboteurs. It’s the politics of deceit and division.
Brexit is a moral weakness too.
We know your views on this. I disagree. There is little point in rerunning the argument.
You are comfortable with whipping up untrue fears of mass immigration to indulge your visceral hatred of the EU. It’s unsurprising we disagree.
No, I’m not.
But if it gives you a warm glow of moral smugness to believe that then go ahead. I care little what you think of me.
You have never disavowed any aspect of how Leavers have conducted yourself. You have no suggestions for how the lies and divisions that Leavers foment should be remedied. You appear to view them as unfortunate necessities.
But apparently Brexit isn’t a moral failing.
You must have missed it then. I’ve repeatedly said I would never vote for a party led by Farage, and that it was Matthew Elliott and Dan Hannan that got me involved in Business for Britain.
I also hosted and financed the launch of the Imitative for Free Trade
You’ve just piggybacked on his efforts.
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
I find it bemusing that so many Remainers like Mr Meeks are mock shocked and horrified at Julie Hartley-Brewer's comments. When these same people have for years been intoning that Brexit is a risk to the union.
If we put unionism first then Brexit might not be a good idea. If we put Brexit first then the union might not be saved.
No reason why some people's preferences can't and shouldn't be Brexit first.
No reason why you can't also have both, even in Scotland the Brexit Party were second in the European Parliament elections and in Wales the Brexit Party were first just like in England
And even in Scotland, Leave was second in the EU referendum.
The SNP only got 38% in the European Parliament elections
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Johnson is standing for the position of UK President, a directly elected post independent of the legislature. Who knew?
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
We have a goods trade deficit of 135 billion. We have a services trade surplus of 92 billion.
Your/Boris's policy is "ideally enhanced access for services" ??
A Canada style FTA is good for GB manufacturing and will actually help our economy become less London centric and boost the Midlands and North exactly as most Leave voters wanted but London will still remain the financial capital of Europe
Why do you think the Midlands and the North should be one gigantic factory? The service economy is also booming in the North.
In the long term manufacturing in the UK is dead, get a grip.
I say this as someone who currently works for a British manufacturer on Tyneside.
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals and no more annual financial contributions to the EU but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
IE what was debated during the Brexit referendum.
Exactly, diehard Remainers are terrified of Boris and a Canada style FTA for GB with the EU as it would actually deliver what Leave voters voted for and would negate their whinging about Brexit armageddon
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
Nope, there is no scope for tactical voting in the US system. Johnson is totally dependent on Farage.
I find it bemusing that so many Remainers like Mr Meeks are mock shocked and horrified at Julie Hartley-Brewer's comments. When these same people have for years been intoning that Brexit is a risk to the union.
If we put unionism first then Brexit might not be a good idea. If we put Brexit first then the union might not be saved.
No reason why some people's preferences can't and shouldn't be Brexit first.
Absolutely right. The English nationalism JHB represents is what underpins Brexit and now controls the former Conservative and Unionist party. Some of us - including Alastair - have been saying this for a while.
No harm in that either.
Its like if we were talking about taxes and the right of the Tories were saying we need to cut taxes, then the left retorts that if you cut taxes you may have to cut spending, repeat ad nauseum and then JHB says "if you're not prepared to cut spending you're not serious about wanting to cut taxes". Then the left reacts with bigger horror that some on the right actually are OK with cutting spending.
Government spending 2007: £630bn Government spending 2010: £755bn. Government spending 2017: £836bn.
Government debt (cumulative overspending above income) £1,836bn, 86% of GDP.
Plenty of scope for cuts there, balancing the books would be a good start.
I appreciate that you are relaxed about the coalition of strident English nationalism and visceral hatred of the EU that is now in charge of your party. But why should those who think it is catastrophic stay around to be abused by the death cult?
And my point is that they are different. One is a policy disagreement and one is a moral weakness. Policy disagreements can and will be ridden out. It’s far harder to do that with moral disagreements without absorbing a taint.
In any event you may say they shouldn’t stick around. I think they will stick around. And they will be right to do so.
The referendum was won by frightening voters into believing that millions of Muslims were poised to descend on Britain. Since then Leavers have sought to label those who don’t agree with them as quislings, traitors and saboteurs. It’s the politics of deceit and division.
Brexit is a moral weakness too.
We know your views on this. I disagree. There is little point in rerunning the argument.
You are comfortable with whipping up untrue fears of mass immigration to indulge your visceral hatred of the EU. It’s unsurprising we disagree.
No, I’m not.
But if it gives you a warm glow of moral smugness to believe that then go ahead. I care little what you think of me.
You have never disavowed any aspect of how Leavers have conducted yourself. You have no suggestions for how the lies and divisions that Leavers foment should be remedied. You appear to view them as unfortunate necessities.
But apparently Brexit isn’t a moral failing.
You must have missed it then. I’ve repeatedly said I would never vote for a party led by Farage, and that it was Matthew Elliott and Dan Hannan that got me involved in Business for Britain.
I also hosted and financed the launch of the Imitative for Free Trade
You’ve just piggybacked on his efforts.
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
I wasn’t happy about it, but Leave.EU was a different organisation to Vote Leave. And posting on this website is the extent of my influence in politics!
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
Just because an area voted Leave does not mean it's going to vote for Boris Johnson.
Over 50% of Leave voters back Boris over Hunt with Yougov and would vote for a Boris led Tory Party
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
Still not convinced, and isn't Johnson even more protected by the machinery of the Conservative Party in a similar way to how the GOP have shielded Trump.
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
How long will it take to negotiate?
Less than Canada took as we already have arrangements with the EU anyway
The point of Brexit was the ability to diverge. Given that Brexiteers will veto any form of disputes resolution mechanism akin to that in the Canada deal as a breach of their precious “sovereignty” that idea falls at the first hurdle. There will be no Canada store FTA because, well, we are not Canada and Brexiteers don’t know what’s in the Canada deal anyway.
Some Faragistes will only accept No Deal WTO terms, but Boris is not a Faragiste
Those suffering from any sleep disorder might wish to tune into Sky News "All Out Politics" tomorrow morning as Jo Swinson and Ed Davey battle it out to find any difference that might disturb a cigarette paper.
I'm finding it quite soporific alrea ..d ...y... ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Technical Betting note on Dem Nominee, the whole back side of the book is now sub 99%. You might think it's a open ended contest but the back side includes a couple of % between Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton
NB in theory at least there could be new entrants.
True, Oprah Winfrey would not be a be considered a new entrant according to the market though.
So after brexit what is next? Obviously a war on red tape which limits rich people from getting richer by imposing standards. An excuse for dramatically lower personal and corporation tax in the name of stimulating the bank accounts of rich people probably ...and then what?
Your own prejudices are showing through
I’d expect a cut in DfID’s budget (although this can be funded through eliminating the c £1.5bn contribution to the E.U. international development aid, but who cares about double counting)
Probably increased defence spending, reform of business rates (to help small businesses), support for farmers, transport infrastructure investment that sort of thing.
Small town England is instinctively suspicious of “big ideas”
Like Brexit?
The “big idea” was ever closer union.
Small town England said “no thanks”
Nope, the big idea was Farage’s nationalism and associated nostalgic drivel. Brexit is the ultimate ideological crusade.
So much easier to dismiss those you disagree with than to engage with their concerns.
If you cannot see that Brexit is an ideological big idea, you are blind. It has exposed the weaknesses of our politics, driven your party mad and it had damaged the country for years to come. And above all it will do nothing to lessen the impact of globalisation.
Brexit is not the “Big Idea”. European integration under the EU (with the people having no say in the matter) is the big idea, and what we are seeing now is the fallout from its rejection.
Brexit represents a powerful new political force, an ideological rose tinted view of the past. Brexit makes Britain great again by taking back control.
It’s a huge political idea, stronger than progressive or conservative politics.
I’d describe it as the rubber band snapping back. It’s not a fully enumerated ideological position.
It’s bigger than that. It’s the politics in a world where people think that yesterday was better than today and that tomorrow will be worse. It’s fatal flaw is that you can never turn the clock back. You always create something new.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be
And the DUP will agree to the border in the Irish Sea?
The DUP can be ignored once Boris wins an overall Tory majority
So Johnson's success is entirely dependent on him winning an overall majority in a general election by the end of October.
OK Got that. But if that doesn't happen, then ....?
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
How long will it take to negotiate?
Less than Canada took as we already have arrangements with the EU anyway
The point of Brexit was the ability to diverge. Given that Brexiteers will veto any form of disputes resolution mechanism akin to that in the Canada deal as a breach of their precious “sovereignty” that idea falls at the first hurdle. There will be no Canada store FTA because, well, we are not Canada and Brexiteers don’t know what’s in the Canada deal anyway.
Some Faragistes will only accept No Deal WTO terms, but Boris is not a Faragiste
Faragists generally know nothing about the WTO resolution mechanism either. If they hated the ECJ they will not love that
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be
And the DUP will agree to the border in the Irish Sea?
The DUP can be ignored once Boris wins an overall Tory majority
So Johnson's success is entirely dependent on him winning an overall majority in a general election by the end of October.
OK Got that. But if that doesn't happen, then ....?
Brexit is entirely dependent on Boris winning an overall majority as the current hung parliament refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement and refuses to vote for No Deal.
So eventually it will have to come to a head, if Boris does not win a majority let Labour and the LDs and SNP deal with it, the Tories can still go united in opposition on a clear hard Brexit platform
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Nope, the big idea was Farage’s nationalism and associated nostalgic drivel. Brexit is the ultimate ideological crusade.
So much easier to dismiss those you disagree with than to engage with their concerns.
If you cannot see that Brexit is an ideological big idea, you are blind. It has exposed the weaknesses of our politics, driven your party mad and it had damaged the country for years to come. And above all it will do nothing to lessen the impact of globalisation.
Some politicians see it as a big idea.
I believe the voters saw it as a shout of “Enough!”
You're projecting.
This all strikes me as so much irrelevant navel-gazing and self-flagellation. It's time to face up to the reality of our place in the world in the 21st century or you'll end up dragging the whole country down in a misguided attempt to atone for the sins of your class. It should be clear by now that Brexit will not help the people in whose name you claim to support it.
I agree with some of what you say (I disagree with much more). But you studiously duck the point.
Put yourself in the shoes of a Conservative MP who sincerely believes no deal Brexit would be disastrous. I understand you disagree, but that’s not the point. What do you think they should do just now, given their views and given that Boris Johnson has made it abundantly clear to secure Brexit on whatever terms by whatever means, including the abrogation of Parliamentary democracy, by 31 October?
I don’t have a view on what they should do. What they will do is sit on their hands.
Then you have written a lot of words to say absolutely nothing on topic.
One of the joys of this site.
My fundamental point is that you have misdiagnosed the situation, so I don’t accept the premise of your argument.
They will bitch and moan but not do anything effective. When Brexit happens it will either be not as bad as they think (in which case they will reintegrate into the party) or it is (in which case they or their successors* will be well positioned to lead the party)
* this process can take a while. It was about 30 years before the Tory party successfully repositioned themselves after the Peelite/Ultra split.
My argument is simply that there are two groups, one in each main party, who are appalled by those in control and who now have a choice to make.
I appreciate that you are relaxed about the coalition of strident English nationalism and visceral hatred of the EU that is now in charge of your party. But why should those who think it is catastrophic stay around to be abused by the death cult?
And my point is that they are different. One is a policy disagreement and one is a moral weakness. Policy disagreements can and will be ridden out. It’s far harder to do that with moral disagreements without absorbing a taint.
In any event you may say they shouldn’t stick around. I think they will stick around. And they will be right to do so.
So, strident blood and soil nationalism and visceral hatred of friends and neighbours is not a moral weakness?
Shame on you.
I think the glass on my irony meter just shattered.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
Just because an area voted Leave does not mean it's going to vote for Boris Johnson.
Over 50% of Leave voters back Boris over Hunt with Yougov and would vote for a Boris led Tory Party
That is a disingenuous reading of that poll par excellance. YouGov has barely any difference in the overall polling and in leadership ratings overall it has Boris well behind.
I find it bemusing that so many Remainers like Mr Meeks are mock shocked and horrified at Julie Hartley-Brewer's comments. When these same people have for years been intoning that Brexit is a risk to the union.
If we put unionism first then Brexit might not be a good idea. If we put Brexit first then the union might not be saved.
No reason why some people's preferences can't and shouldn't be Brexit first.
No reason why you can't also have both, even in Scotland the Brexit Party were second in the European Parliament elections and in Wales the Brexit Party were first just like in England
And even in Scotland, Leave was second in the EU referendum.
The SNP only got 38% in the European Parliament elections
I think it's really easy to say that politicians at odds with their party should leave it, but under FPTP it is not that simple. Defeat outside the party is not only likely, it is almost inevitable.
Consider what would have happened to the Socialist Campaign Group of MPs if they had left Labour over the Iraq War. At best one or two of them will have clung on for an election cycle or two. Some of the others would have split the non-Tory vote, allowing Conservatives to win otherwise fairly safe Labour seats, damning them in the eyes of the people they needed to win over. Eventually they would have sunk without a trace.
What happened instead? They stuck to their principles on the backbenches. Their time came. Now they sit on the Opposition front bench. Government beckons.
Consider also Blair. He did not stand to be elected by the Alliance in 1983. He wrote to Foot professing his adherence to Marxism. He became one of the longest-serving Prime Ministers of the 20th Century. We didn't hear much about Marxism then.
Labour opponents of anti-semitism and Tory opponents of anti-Europeanism have to coolly consider what action is most likely to succeed. If they leave their parties it must be because they believe they have a better chance of replacing their party from without then of reclaiming the party from within. Or they have given up.
He only served two and a half years of the twentieth century (okay - that is probably the most pedantic thing I have every typed...)
Oh yeah.
Somehow I think of 21st century politics starting around 2007-9.
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
We have a goods trade deficit of 135 billion. We have a services trade surplus of 92 billion.
Your/Boris's policy is "ideally enhanced access for services" ??
A Canada style FTA is good for GB manufacturing and will actually help our economy become less London centric and boost the Midlands and North exactly as most Leave voters wanted but London will still remain the financial capital of Europe
Why do you think the Midlands and the North should be one gigantic factory? The service economy is also booming in the North.
In the long term manufacturing in the UK is dead, get a grip.
I say this as someone who currently works for a British manufacturer on Tyneside.
You are completely wrong
Manufacturing where labour cost is important or where low costs requires compromise on environmental standards is probably not viable
But there is absolutely space for high value added specialist manufacturing
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
"Could"... Won't .
While I appreciate that you have become the Black Knight for the Tories here, the reality is that the only Canadian thing now in prospect is the wipe out of Conservative seats at the next GE.... its going to be a lot more than a flesh wound.
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services. The EU-South Korea FTA, for instance, covering over 100 services sectors, has been described as one of the EU’s most ambitious FTAs in terms of sectoral coverage. However, the scope and extent of market access commitments varies between different FTAs and even comprehensive agreements may fall short on some sectors: the proposed trade deal between the EU and Canada does not cover audio-visual, air transport and financial services.
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
We have a goods trade deficit of 135 billion. We have a services trade surplus of 92 billion.
Your/Boris's policy is "ideally enhanced access for services" ??
A Canada style FTA is good for GB manufacturing and will actually help our economy become less London centric and boost the Midlands and North exactly as most Leave voters wanted but London will still remain the financial capital of Europe
Why do you think the Midlands and the North should be one gigantic factory? The service economy is also booming in the North.
In the long term manufacturing in the UK is dead, get a grip.
I say this as someone who currently works for a British manufacturer on Tyneside.
'In the long term manufacturing in the UK is dead', straight from the mouth of a diehard Remainer and they wonder why Leave won with that attitude!
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
Nope, there is no scope for tactical voting in the US system. Johnson is totally dependent on Farage.
What an absolutely ridiculous point. Hillary got 48% of the vote in 2016, far more than Labour or the LDs have ever got but Trump still won
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be
And the DUP will agree to the border in the Irish Sea?
The DUP can be ignored once Boris wins an overall Tory majority
So Johnson's success is entirely dependent on him winning an overall majority in a general election by the end of October.
OK Got that. But if that doesn't happen, then ....?
Brexit is entirely dependent on Boris winning an overall majority as the current hung parliament refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement and refuses to vote for No Deal.
So eventually it will have to come to a head, if Boris does not win a majority let Labour and the LDs and SNP deal with it, the Tories can still go united in opposition on a clear hard Brexit platform
If Labour, LDs and SNP each have Remain in their manifesto and Labour forms a government with C&S from LDs and SNP, it will have a mandate to simply revoke A50 without the need for a referendum. It would do so before 31 October.
And that will be the end of Brexit. I think this is a more likely scenario than Johnson winning an overall majority before the end of October.
Those suffering from any sleep disorder might wish to tune into Sky News "All Out Politics" tomorrow morning as Jo Swinson and Ed Davey battle it out to find any difference that might disturb a cigarette paper.
I'm finding it quite soporific alrea ..d ...y... ZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
What time is it on?
Sometime between 9-11am. No more precise time yet.
It has been vaguely illuminating to see the split opening up between the two leading 'Brexiteers' on this site - PT and HYUFD. Me thinks that even PT is getting a bit exasperated by the rubbish that HYUFD is producing on how a Johnson leadership will play out.
I voted Remain, so can hardly be described as a 'leading Brexiteer', certainly compared to Gin or Philip Thompson or Viceroy of Orange or KJohnW etc.
I also disagree with Philip Thompson on a lot of things, he is an English nationalist in some respects and a libertarian, I am neither.
However I also respect democracy and back the FTA for GB Boris does and most Leave voters want
It's quite obvious that you can only survive in your party as someone who showed some sense three years ago if you now ape the most fanatical stuff coming from the extreme
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
"Could"... Won't .
While I appreciate that you have become the Black Knight for the Tories here, the reality is that the only Canadian thing now in prospect is the wipe out of Conservative seats at the next GE.... its going to be a lot more than a flesh wound.
That will only happy if Brexit is not delivered by October, in which case both Labour in its Leave seats as well as the Tories will face wipeout by Farage and the Brexit Party
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
Vote Leave put out a pamphlet called "Paving the road from Ankara: the EU, immigration and the NHS" replete with scare stories about Turkish accession. The idea that Leave.EU did all the dirty work is not true.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be
And the DUP will agree to the border in the Irish Sea?
The DUP can be ignored once Boris wins an overall Tory majority
So Johnson's success is entirely dependent on him winning an overall majority in a general election by the end of October.
OK Got that. But if that doesn't happen, then ....?
Brexit is entirely dependent on Boris winning an overall majority as the current hung parliament refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement and refuses to vote for No Deal.
So eventually it will have to come to a head, if Boris does not win a majority let Labour and the LDs and SNP deal with it, the Tories can still go united in opposition on a clear hard Brexit platform
If Labour, LDs and SNP each have Remain in their manifesto and Labour forms a government with C&S from LDs and SNP, it will have a mandate to simply revoke A50 without the need for a referendum. It would do so before 31 October.
And that will be the end of Brexit. I think this is a more likely scenario than Johnson winning an overall majority before the end of October.
Well that is your view but it would at least be a choice, give Boris a majority to deliver Brexit or get no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option is not comprehensive. Switzerland’s bilateral agreements cover only some sectors, such as some types of insurance and public procurement, while excluding important sectors such as financial services. Swiss firms therefore need to set up subsidiary operations in an EU member state in order to be able to access the EU services market in those sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals and no more annual financial contributions to the EU but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
IE what was debated during the Brexit referendum.
Exactly, diehard Remainers are terrified of Boris and a Canada style FTA for GB with the EU as it would actually deliver what Leave voters voted for and would negate their whinging about Brexit armageddon
No. What we are scared of is people who know nothing about free trade deals assuming we can waltz into a Canada + deal in short order leading the country off a cliff. I know a fair amount about how Brussels operates given what I do for a living and my view is that it can’t politically, logistically or legally happen. If a Canada style deal were possible then great. But it isn’t. My professional opinion, which you can take or leave, is that it isn’t. Canada presents a whole different set of opportunities and threats to the EU and they will approach the negotiations very differently. Because of our geographical proximity we are seen as far more of a threat than Canada to the EU so they will undoubtedly cross a lot of those “red lines”.
Furthermore our negotiations will be led by a man whose track record in such matters involves buying crowd-control vehicles from the Germans without checking whether they could be used on London’s streets and reselling them at a loss of £300,000. That’s not to mention the useless bridge.
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
Vote Leave put out a pamphlet called "Paving the road from Ankara: the EU, immigration and the NHS" replete with scare stories about Turkish accession. The idea that Leave.EU did all the dirty work is not true.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
"Could"... Won't .
While I appreciate that you have become the Black Knight for the Tories here, the reality is that the only Canadian thing now in prospect is the wipe out of Conservative seats at the next GE.... its going to be a lot more than a flesh wound.
That will only happy if Brexit is not delivered by October, in which case both Labour in its Leave seats as well as the Tories will face wipeout by Farage and the Brexit Party
My Northern constituency voted 57% for Leave so well above the 'average'. Its current MP is a diehard Labour Remainer with a majority of 21.5%. I bet you £5 that in the event of an election after October with Brexit still not being implemented, she will still win. Handsomely.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be
And the DUP will agree to the border in the Irish Sea?
The DUP can be ignored once Boris wins an overall Tory majority
So Johnson's success is entirely dependent on him winning an overall majority in a general election by the end of October.
OK Got that. But if that doesn't happen, then ....?
Brexit is entirely dependent on Boris winning an overall majority as the current hung parliament refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement and refuses to vote for No Deal.
So eventually it will have to come to a head, if Boris does not win a majority let Labour and the LDs and SNP deal with it, the Tories can still go united in opposition on a clear hard Brexit platform
If Labour, LDs and SNP each have Remain in their manifesto and Labour forms a government with C&S from LDs and SNP, it will have a mandate to simply revoke A50 without the need for a referendum. It would do so before 31 October.
And that will be the end of Brexit. I think this is a more likely scenario than Johnson winning an overall majority before the end of October.
Well that is your view but it would at least be a choice, give Boris a majority to deliver Brexit or get no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
That was May's offer in 2017 (watch the video from 1:50). She successfully maximised the pro-Brexit vote available in a General Election but it still wasn't enough. The idea that Johnson will do better with a resurgent Farage in the mix is risible.
A free trade agreement (FTA) offers scope for liberalisation in services.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
We have a goods trade deficit of 135 billion. We have a services trade surplus of 92 billion.
Your/Boris's policy is "ideally enhanced access for services" ??
A Canada style FTA is good for GB manufacturing and will actually help our economy become less London centric and boost the Midlands and North exactly as most Leave voters wanted but London will still remain the financial capital of Europe
Why do you think the Midlands and the North should be one gigantic factory? The service economy is also booming in the North.
In the long term manufacturing in the UK is dead, get a grip.
I say this as someone who currently works for a British manufacturer on Tyneside.
You are completely wrong
Manufacturing where labour cost is important or where low costs requires compromise on environmental standards is probably not viable
But there is absolutely space for high value added specialist manufacturing
Would you agree that high tech manufacturing, as opposed to low tech metal bashing, is particularly dependent on international supply chains, particularly those within the single market?
Nope, the big idea was Farage’s nationalism and associated nostalgic drivel. Brexit is the ultimate ideological crusade.
So much easier to dismiss those you disagree with than to engage with their concerns.
If you cannot see that Brexit is an ideological big idea, you are blind. It has exposed the weaknesses of our politics, driven your party mad and it had damaged the country for years to come. And above all it will do nothing to lessen the impact of globalisation.
Some politicians see it as a big idea.
I believe the voters saw it as a shout of “Enough!”
You're projecting.
This all strikes me as so much irrelevant navel-gazing and self-flagellation. It's time to face up to the reality of our place in the world in the 21st century or you'll end up dragging the whole country down in a misguided attempt to atone for the sins of your class. It should be clear by now that Brexit will not help the people in whose name you claim to support it.
People who say “Brexit won’t solve this” are both right and missing the point.
As things stand, our politicians are restricted in their ability to fix the problems and are insulated from the consequences of their failure (it’s very easy for them to blame “Europe”)
Post Brexit they will have nowhere to hide. I hope the voters will hold them accountable for their failures.
It is certainly true that crunch time may well be approaching for Tory MPs who hate the idea of No Deal. However, I don't see why they have to act NOW.
The key question is - are enough of them prepared to bring down the Johnson government if it pursues No Deal by supporting Corbyn in a VONC?
If yes, No Deal is blocked absent a general election. If no, they may as well shut up and go along with it, because all else is empty posturing and virtue signalling.
I think there probably are enough prepared to do that.
I also think Johnson is all mouth and no trousers on this one, and will not in any event try to force a No Deal through. I think he will take an extension and seek to pass a (cosmetically) amended deal in 2020.
Therefore, I am laying 'No Deal Brexit in 2019' at 3.5. IMO it ought to be priced significantly bigger than that. I assess it at around 6 for fair value.
Also @HYUFD I am not a diehard Remainer. I would happily leave the EU with an EFTA/EEA arrangement including free movement of people.
Which as Yougov showed last week is Remainers second choice but Leavers' third
Do we want politicians who lead the country to what they believe is a more prosperous future or ones that follow opinion polls? Why should opinion polls about leavers first choices carry more weight? They’ve had their day about leaving - if they don’t let the rest of the country have a say about the destination once we’ve left then trouble lies ahead. Minorities shouldn’t have to lie down and shut up at mantras about the “will of the people”. EFTA is a sensible way out that honours the referendum.
Nope, the big idea was Farage’s nationalism and associated nostalgic drivel. Brexit is the ultimate ideological crusade.
So much easier to dismiss those you disagree with than to engage with their concerns.
If you cannot see that Brexit is an ideological big idea, you are blind. It has exposed the weaknesses of our politics, driven your party mad and it had damaged the country for years to come. And above all it will do nothing to lessen the impact of globalisation.
Some politicians see it as a big idea.
I believe the voters saw it as a shout of “Enough!”
You're projecting.
This all strikes me as so much irrelevant navel-gazing and self-flagellation. It's time to face up to the reality of our place in the world in the 21st century or you'll end up dragging the whole country down in a misguided attempt to atone for the sins of your class. It should be clear by now that Brexit will not help the people in whose name you claim to support it.
People who say “Brexit won’t solve this” are both right and missing the point.
As things stand, our politicians are restricted in their ability to fix the problems and are insulated from the consequences of their failure (it’s very easy for them to blame “Europe”)
Post Brexit they will have nowhere to hide. I hope the voters will hold them accountable for their failures.
As far as I'm concerned the European Commission is "our politicians". I'd rather be represented in trade negotiations by Cecilia Malmström than Liam Fox.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
"Could"... Won't .
While I appreciate that you have become the Black Knight for the Tories here, the reality is that the only Canadian thing now in prospect is the wipe out of Conservative seats at the next GE.... its going to be a lot more than a flesh wound.
That will only happy if Brexit is not delivered by October, in which case both Labour in its Leave seats as well as the Tories will face wipeout by Farage and the Brexit Party
My Northern constituency voted 57% for Leave so well above the 'average'. Its current MP is a diehard Labour Remainer with a majority of 21.5%. I bet you £5 that in the event of an election after October with Brexit still not being implemented, she will still win. Handsomely.
Indeed. Diehard remainers won handsomely in many leave areas in 2017. The idea that they will vote for Boris in 2019 is for the birds.
Nope, the big idea was Farage’s nationalism and associated nostalgic drivel. Brexit is the ultimate ideological crusade.
So much easier to dismiss those you disagree with than to engage with their concerns.
If you cannot see that Brexit is an ideological big idea, you are blind. It has exposed the weaknesses of our politics, driven your party mad and it had damaged the country for years to come. And above all it will do nothing to lessen the impact of globalisation.
Some politicians see it as a big idea.
I believe the voters saw it as a shout of “Enough!”
You're projecting.
This all strikes me as so much irrelevant navel-gazing and self-flagellation. It's time to face up to the reality of our place in the world in the 21st century or you'll end up dragging the whole country down in a misguided attempt to atone for the sins of your class. It should be clear by now that Brexit will not help the people in whose name you claim to support it.
People who say “Brexit won’t solve this” are both right and missing the point.
As things stand, our politicians are restricted in their ability to fix the problems and are insulated from the consequences of their failure (it’s very easy for them to blame “Europe”)
Post Brexit they will have nowhere to hide. I hope the voters will hold them accountable for their failures.
That’s total crap. With that kind of right wing politics there’s always someone new to blame. London and liberalism are the latest on this very thread.
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
Vote Leave put out a pamphlet called "Paving the road from Ankara: the EU, immigration and the NHS" replete with scare stories about Turkish accession. The idea that Leave.EU did all the dirty work is not true.
Remind me wasn't it UK policy for Turkey to join the EU ?
Only that once they met the entry conditions yes, as they were ever likely to meet the entry conditions it made good diplomatic sense to keep open the option. As it happens they have gone further backwards. To claim Turkey were on the verge of joining was a lie along with countless others told by the leave campaign.
Nope, the big idea was Farage’s nationalism and associated nostalgic drivel. Brexit is the ultimate ideological crusade.
So much easier to dismiss those you disagree with than to engage with their concerns.
If you cannot see that Brexit is an ideological big idea, you are blind. It has exposed the weaknesses of our politics, driven your party mad and it had damaged the country for years to come. And above all it will do nothing to lessen the impact of globalisation.
Some politicians see it as a big idea.
I believe the voters saw it as a shout of “Enough!”
You're projecting.
This all strikes me as so much irrelevant navel-gazing and self-flagellation. It's time to face up to the reality of our place in the world in the 21st century or you'll end up dragging the whole country down in a misguided attempt to atone for the sins of your class. It should be clear by now that Brexit will not help the people in whose name you claim to support it.
People who say “Brexit won’t solve this” are both right and missing the point.
As things stand, our politicians are restricted in their ability to fix the problems and are insulated from the consequences of their failure (it’s very easy for them to blame “Europe”)
Post Brexit they will have nowhere to hide. I hope the voters will hold them accountable for their failures.
How are out politicians restricted in fixing the problems?
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
Vote Leave put out a pamphlet called "Paving the road from Ankara: the EU, immigration and the NHS" replete with scare stories about Turkish accession. The idea that Leave.EU did all the dirty work is not true.
Remind me wasn't it UK policy for Turkey to join the EU ?
Only that once they met the entry conditions yes, as they were ever likely to meet the entry conditions it made good diplomatic sense to keep open the option. As it happens they have gone further backwards. To claim Turkey were on the verge of joining was a lie along with countless others told by the leave campaign.
How is it a lie to state current U.K. and EU government policy, which in 2016 was to allow Turkey into the EU? I agree it’s not the case now, as Turkey has regressed somewhat from the criteria of EU membership under Erdogan, but three or four years ago it was very much a live subject of discussion within the EU.
People who say “Brexit won’t solve this” are both right and missing the point.
As things stand, our politicians are restricted in their ability to fix the problems and are insulated from the consequences of their failure (it’s very easy for them to blame “Europe”)
Post Brexit they will have nowhere to hide. I hope the voters will hold them accountable for their failures.
OK.
So leaving is (at best) a great big bucket of pointless unless we implement some very significant changes that would have been verboten as EU members.
This is a point I have made repeatedly.
And when I press Leavers on what those changes might be (other than on immigration) answer comes there none.
Corbyn style socialism would count, of course, but there seems to be little appetite for this in Leaver circles.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that ry.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
"Could"... Won't .
While I appreciate that you have become the Black Knight for the Tories here, the reality is that the only Canadian thing now in prospect is the wipe out of Conservative seats at the next GE.... its going to be a lot more than a flesh wound.
That will only happy if Brexit is not delivered by October, in which case both Labour in its Leave seats as well as the Tories will face wipeout by Farage and the Brexit Party
My Northern constituency voted 57% for Leave so well above the 'average'. Its current MP is a diehard Labour Remainer with a majority of 21.5%. I bet you £5 that in the event of an election after October with Brexit still not being implemented, she will still win. Handsomely.
Indeed. Diehard remainers won handsomely in many leave areas in 2017. The idea that they will vote for Boris in 2019 is for the birds.
In 2017 Corbyn campaigned to deliver Brexit, if Labour campaigned for EUref2 or to reverse Brexit that is a totally different scenario in Labour Leave marginal seats Boris could pick up.
The Brexit Party also won a lot of Northern Leave areas in the European Parliament elections like Doncaster and Wigan the Tories could never win
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
Vote Leave put out a pamphlet called "Paving the road from Ankara: the EU, immigration and the NHS" replete with scare stories about Turkish accession. The idea that Leave.EU did all the dirty work is not true.
Remind me wasn't it UK policy for Turkey to join the EU ?
Only that once they met the entry conditions yes, as they were ever likely to meet the entry conditions it made good diplomatic sense to keep open the option. As it happens they have gone further backwards. To claim Turkey were on the verge of joining was a lie along with countless others told by the leave campaign.
How is it a lie to state current U.K. and EU government policy, which in 2016 was to allow Turkey into the EU? I agree it’s not the case now, as Turkey has regressed somewhat from the criteria of EU membership under Erdogan, but three or four years ago it was very much a live subject of discussion within the EU.
They were never on the verge of joining the EU so that claim was a lie.
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
Vote Leave put out a pamphlet called "Paving the road from Ankara: the EU, immigration and the NHS" replete with scare stories about Turkish accession. The idea that Leave.EU did all the dirty work is not true.
Remind me wasn't it UK policy for Turkey to join the EU ?
Only that once they met the entry conditions yes, as they were ever likely to meet the entry conditions it made good diplomatic sense to keep open the option. As it happens they have gone further backwards. To claim Turkey were on the verge of joining was a lie along with countless others told by the leave campaign.
So the policy of the EU, the UK and of Turkey was that Turkey should join the EU.
That was the reality which you are in denial about.
Especially given that the EU had shown a willingness to ignore its own rules on the migration issue of the time.
And the lies that UK governments had told about the numbers of immigrants who would come to the UK.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
Boris wants to deliver a FTA for GB and ignore diehard Remainers whinging
He has no idea how to get what he wants and he is making promises he cannot keep.
He does, he will remove the temporary Customs Union for GB from the Withdrawal Agreement which May asked for and Barnier did not require and he will let Northern Ireland voters decide on the backstop by referendum if need be
And the DUP will agree to the border in the Irish Sea?
The DUP can be ignored once Boris wins an overall Tory majority
So Johnson's success is entirely dependent on him winning an overall majority in a general election by the end of October.
OK Got that. But if that doesn't happen, then ....?
Brexit is entirely dependent on Boris winning an overall majority as the current hung parliament refuses to vote for the Withdrawal Agreement and refuses to vote for No Deal.
So eventually it will have to come to a head, if Boris does not win a majority let Labour and the LDs and SNP deal with it, the Tories can still go united in opposition on a clear hard Brexit platform
If Labour, LDs and SNP each have Remain in their manifesto and Labour forms a government with C&S from LDs and SNP, it will have a mandate to simply revoke A50 without the need for a referendum. It would do so before 31 October.
And that will be the end of Brexit. I think this is a more likely scenario than Johnson winning an overall majority before the end of October.
Well that is your view but it would at least be a choice, give Boris a majority to deliver Brexit or get no Brexit at all with Labour, the LDs and SNP
That was May's offer in 2017 (watch the video from 1:50). She successfully maximised the pro-Brexit vote available in a General Election but it still wasn't enough. The idea that Johnson will do better with a resurgent Farage in the mix is risible.
In 2017 Labour was also promising to deliver Brexit while Remainers were still voting for Labour rather than defecting to the LDs as is more the case now
It is certainly true that crunch time may well be approaching for Tory MPs who hate the idea of No Deal. However, I don't see why they have to act NOW.
The key question is - are enough of them prepared to bring down the Johnson government if it pursues No Deal by supporting Corbyn in a VONC?
If yes, No Deal is blocked absent a general election. If no, they may as well shut up and go along with it, because all else is empty posturing and virtue signalling.
I think there probably are enough prepared to do that.
I also think Johnson is all mouth and no trousers on this one, and will not in any event try to force a No Deal through. I think he will take an extension and seek to pass a (cosmetically) amended deal in 2020.
Therefore, I am laying 'No Deal Brexit in 2019' at 3.5. IMO it ought to be priced significantly bigger than that. I assess it at around 6 for fair value.
Everything you say there makes absolute logical sense. It’s precisely because it makes absolute logical sense that, in the current climate, I don’t think it will happen.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
Nope, there is no scope for tactical voting in the US system. Johnson is totally dependent on Farage.
What an absolutely ridiculous point. Hillary got 48% of the vote in 2016, far more than Labour or the LDs have ever got but Trump still won
I'm sorry you don't understand the point I'm making. Though I'm not surprised.
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals and no more annual financial contributions to the EU but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
IE what was debated during the Brexit referendum.
Exactly, diehard Remainers are terrified of Boris and a Canada style FTA for GB with the EU as it would actually deliver what Leave voters voted for and would negate their whinging about Brexit armageddon
No. What we are scared of is people who know nothing about free trade deals assuming we can waltz into a Canada + deal in short order leading the country off a cliff. I know a fair amount about how Brussels operates given what I do for a living and my view is that it can’t politically, logistically or legally happen. If a Canada style deal were possible then great. But it isn’t. My professional opinion, which you can take or leave, is that it isn’t. Canada presents a whole different set of opportunities and threats to the EU and they will approach the negotiations very differently. Because of our geographical proximity we are seen as far more of a threat than Canada to the EU so they will undoubtedly cross a lot of those “red lines”.
Furthermore our negotiations will be led by a man whose track record in such matters involves buying crowd-control vehicles from the Germans without checking whether they could be used on London’s streets and reselling them at a loss of £300,000. That’s not to mention the useless bridge.
Even Barnier has offered a Canada style FTA for GB, you are wholly negative about a Canada style Deal as ideologically you are biased and do not want a proper Brexit to be delivered
It is certainly true that crunch time may well be approaching for Tory MPs who hate the idea of No Deal. However, I don't see why they have to act NOW.
The key question is - are enough of them prepared to bring down the Johnson government if it pursues No Deal by supporting Corbyn in a VONC?
If yes, No Deal is blocked absent a general election. If no, they may as well shut up and go along with it, because all else is empty posturing and virtue signalling.
I think there probably are enough prepared to do that.
I also think Johnson is all mouth and no trousers on this one, and will not in any event try to force a No Deal through. I think he will take an extension and seek to pass a (cosmetically) amended deal in 2020.
Therefore, I am laying 'No Deal Brexit in 2019' at 3.5. IMO it ought to be priced significantly bigger than that. I assess it at around 6 for fair value.
Everything you say there makes absolute logical sense. It’s precisely because it makes absolute logical sense that, in the current climate, I don’t think it will happen.
Do you believe in the infinite improbability drive
Everything you say there makes absolute logical sense. It’s precisely because it makes absolute logical sense that, in the current climate, I don’t think it will happen.
You think he WILL make a serious attempt to No Deal exit on 31 Oct?
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
Still not convinced, and isn't Johnson even more protected by the machinery of the Conservative Party in a similar way to how the GOP have shielded Trump.
Johnson is entirely in control of the Conservative party. He has the membership eating out of his hands. The problem is that he has no meaningful control over Conservative party Brexit policy. Nigel Farage controls that.
On the basis of that Ridge interview Johnson has no meaningful strategy beyond unicorns and when it all goes pear-shaped he will take no responsibility whatsoever. A complete charlatan who will soon be deservedly exposed for the fraud he is.
It hasn't worked that way with Trump and it won't for Johnson.
Trump is working within a completely different system that shields him despite the large majority of Americans opposing him. The dynamics are different in the UK.
I don't think that they are. Johnson's back-story supports me too, from Darius Guppy, the zip wire, through the garden bridge to Carrie-gate. The chaotic personal life, the profligate Mayor, the dangerously incompetent Foreign Secretary.
Any one of these issues should sink a career, but Johnson gets a free pass. 'Boris will be Boris'!
This is the first time he has come under sustained and critical scrutiny. Trump can win despite being hugely unpopular. I doubt Johnson can because the UK system is very different. And Johnson is entirely dependent on Farage, so cannot pivot.
No, the UK system is exactly the same as the US system ie FPTP.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
Nope, there is no scope for tactical voting in the US system. Johnson is totally dependent on Farage.
What an absolutely ridiculous point. Hillary got 48% of the vote in 2016, far more than Labour or the LDs have ever got but Trump still won
I'm sorry you don't understand the point I'm making. Though I'm not surprised.
You clearly do not understand 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave even if only 52% of voters did
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
Except Farage was deliberately ostracised from Vote Leave so you're talking nonsense.
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
Vote Leave whipped up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on the UK, so your point is without foundation.
Vote Leave put out a pamphlet called "Paving the road from Ankara: the EU, immigration and the NHS" replete with scare stories about Turkish accession. The idea that Leave.EU did all the dirty work is not true.
Remind me wasn't it UK policy for Turkey to join the EU ?
Only that once they met the entry conditions yes, as they were ever likely to meet the entry conditions it made good diplomatic sense to keep open the option. As it happens they have gone further backwards. To claim Turkey were on the verge of joining was a lie along with countless others told by the leave campaign.
How is it a lie to state current U.K. and EU government policy, which in 2016 was to allow Turkey into the EU? I agree it’s not the case now, as Turkey has regressed somewhat from the criteria of EU membership under Erdogan, but three or four years ago it was very much a live subject of discussion within the EU.
They were never on the verge of joining the EU so that claim was a lie.
Just because events have turned out differently, didn’t mean that it was a lie back in 2016.
Here’s 2014 David Cameron, speaking enthusiastically about how Turkey “Deserves it’s place at the top table of European politics” https://youtube.com/watch?v=S6qEtntqckE
Most Labour Remain voters went with the party in 2017 to get a softer Brexit .
I don’t know anyone who thought voting Labour would lead to no Brexit .
The polarization since then has been caused by the no dealers , the more they’ve pushed this as the only Brexit the more they’ve driven the other side into Remain.
I was happy to accept a compromise then but seeing as that’s now out of the question, that Farage and the rest will shout betrayal at any sensible exit means if Remainers are going to have to put up with the same old crap from the no deal death cult then I’d rather have that with the UK still in the EU.
Free trade agreements can achieve significant liberalisation in services trade…
Similarly, concluding a set of ‘Swiss-style’ bilateral agreements with the EU offers the potential for greater access to the EU services market, but this option sectors.
So what format will Boris's FTA take? What sectors will be included and what wont? Who will lose out?
It will be at least a Canada style FTA, maybe more
Just to move the debate on, would you be able to summarise what you mean by a "Canada style FTA" for us, in a couple of paragraphs? And what does the "more" of "maybemore" consist of? ta.
Out of the EU, out of the Single Market and Customs Union, able to control our own borders and make our own trade deals and no more annual financial contributions to the EU but with largely tariff free trade in goods with the EU and ideally enhanced access for services too
IE what was debated during the Brexit referendum.
Exactly, diehard Remainers are terrified of Boris and a Canada style FTA for GB with the EU as it would actually deliver what Leave voters voted for and would negate their whinging about Brexit armageddon
No. What we are scared of is people who know nothing about free trade more of a threat than Canada to the EU so they will undoubtedly cross a lot of those “red lines”.
Furthermore our negotiations will be led by a man whose track record in such matters involves buying crowd-control vehicles from the Germans without checking whether they could be used on London’s streets and reselling them at a loss of £300,000. That’s not to mention the useless bridge.
Even Barnier has offered a Canada style FTA for GB, you are wholly negative about a Canada style Deal as ideologically you are biased and do not want a proper Brexit to be delivered
A Canada style deal is better for GB than a No Deal. It is much worse for the UK than our current deal. It is also only something you can believe is achievable if you believe Boris Johnson is a liar.
Comments
A second issue is that people with strong views on everything set up litmus tests which they demand you pass, or else you're the enemy. Ultra-Remainers demand that Labour commits not only to a referendum with a Remain option but to endorsing Remain unequivocally. Ultra-Brexiteers demand that you put Brexit ahead of the unity of the UK, or else you're a traitor. Anti-Williamson campaigners demand that MPs sign the letter to suspend him for saying Labour's been too defensive, or otherwise be seen as anti-semites.
Loyalists on all sides recoil from this level of intensity - they don't necessarily see the EU as wholly good or wholly bad, they don't think their party is really Islamophobic or anti-semitic. They don't see any of these things as the decisive make-or-break moments. And so they shake their heads worriedly and soldier on.
We have a services trade surplus of 92 billion.
Your/Boris's policy is "ideally enhanced access for services" ??
You might think it's a open ended contest but the back side includes a couple of % between Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton
https://tradingeconomics.com/poland/gdp-per-capita
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-per-capita
Now there's more to economics than GDP, even more to living standards and yet more to quality of life but the likelihood of Poland matching the UK economy is pretty slim in the foreseeable future.
Boris could win even while losing the popular vote given 2/3 of constituencies voted Leave
I also hosted and financed the launch of the Imitative for Free Trade
Specifically: liberalisation of the NHS, liberalisation of food packaging requirements, visa liberalisation for Indian citizens.
Spoiler: they won't be.
There was a very astute point made yesterday about how those Labour politicians who were not anti-Semitic but were willing to let the attacks continue for political advantage were more morally reprehensible than those they propped up. The same is true of the EEA Leavers who were happy to let anti-immigrant sentiment be whipped up to further their own goals.
In the long term manufacturing in the UK is dead, get a grip.
I say this as someone who currently works for a British manufacturer on Tyneside.
Government spending 2010: £755bn.
Government spending 2017: £836bn.
Government debt (cumulative overspending above income) £1,836bn, 86% of GDP.
Plenty of scope for cuts there, balancing the books would be a good start.
Source: https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicspending/datasets/esatable11annualexpenditureofgeneralgovernment/current/uktable1100generalgovernment19952017.xlsx
Liz Truss for Chancellor!
Spoiler: they aren't.
OK Got that. But if that doesn't happen, then ....?
So eventually it will have to come to a head, if Boris does not win a majority let Labour and the LDs and SNP deal with it, the Tories can still go united in opposition on a clear hard Brexit platform
What you're suggesting is that Luciana Berger and Chuka etc are morally reprehensible if they vote in the same lobby as Williamson and Corbyn on an issue despite being in different parties.
This all strikes me as so much irrelevant navel-gazing and self-flagellation. It's time to face up to the reality of our place in the world in the 21st century or you'll end up dragging the whole country down in a misguided attempt to atone for the sins of your class. It should be clear by now that Brexit will not help the people in whose name you claim to support it.
That is a disingenuous reading of that poll par excellance. YouGov has barely any difference in the overall polling and in leadership ratings overall it has Boris well behind.
As would everyone else in the country.
Somehow I think of 21st century politics starting around 2007-9.
Manufacturing where labour cost is important or where low costs requires compromise on environmental standards is probably not viable
But there is absolutely space for high value added specialist manufacturing
While I appreciate that you have become the Black Knight for the Tories here, the reality is that the only Canadian thing now in prospect is the wipe out of Conservative seats at the next GE.... its going to be a lot more than a flesh wound.
I'm not saying there will be no manufacturing in the UK in the long term but how much of our economy is it going to account for, really?
And that will be the end of Brexit. I think this is a more likely scenario than Johnson winning an overall majority before the end of October.
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1142049815859257346?s=19
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/voteleave/pages/24/attachments/original/1463745000/Vote_Leave_-_'Paving_the_road_from_Ankara'_the_EU__immigration_and_the_NHS.pdf
Furthermore our negotiations will be led by a man whose track record in such matters involves buying crowd-control vehicles from the Germans without checking whether they could be used on London’s streets and reselling them at a loss of £300,000. That’s not to mention the useless bridge.
My Northern constituency voted 57% for Leave so well above the 'average'. Its current MP is a diehard Labour Remainer with a majority of 21.5%. I bet you £5 that in the event of an election after October with Brexit still not being implemented, she will still win. Handsomely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xr9-CkZZRk
As things stand, our politicians are restricted in their ability to fix the problems and are insulated from the consequences of their failure (it’s very easy for them to blame “Europe”)
Post Brexit they will have nowhere to hide. I hope the voters will hold them accountable for their failures.
The key question is - are enough of them prepared to bring down the Johnson government if it pursues No Deal by supporting Corbyn in a VONC?
If yes, No Deal is blocked absent a general election. If no, they may as well shut up and go along with it, because all else is empty posturing and virtue signalling.
I think there probably are enough prepared to do that.
I also think Johnson is all mouth and no trousers on this one, and will not in any event try to force a No Deal through. I think he will take an extension and seek to pass a (cosmetically) amended deal in 2020.
Therefore, I am laying 'No Deal Brexit in 2019' at 3.5. IMO it ought to be priced significantly bigger than that. I assess it at around 6 for fair value.
How are out politicians restricted in fixing the problems?
Boris will speak the for the shitbag bankers when nobody else will. Heartwarming.
So leaving is (at best) a great big bucket of pointless unless we implement some very significant changes that would have been verboten as EU members.
This is a point I have made repeatedly.
And when I press Leavers on what those changes might be (other than on immigration) answer comes there none.
Corbyn style socialism would count, of course, but there seems to be little appetite for this in Leaver circles.
The Brexit Party also won a lot of Northern Leave areas in the European Parliament elections like Doncaster and Wigan the Tories could never win
That was the reality which you are in denial about.
Especially given that the EU had shown a willingness to ignore its own rules on the migration issue of the time.
And the lies that UK governments had told about the numbers of immigrants who would come to the UK.
Here’s 2014 David Cameron, speaking enthusiastically about how Turkey “Deserves it’s place at the top table of European politics”
https://youtube.com/watch?v=S6qEtntqckE
I don’t know anyone who thought voting Labour would lead to no Brexit .
The polarization since then has been caused by the no dealers , the more they’ve pushed this as the only Brexit the more they’ve driven the other side into Remain.
I was happy to accept a compromise then but seeing as that’s now out of the question, that Farage and the rest will shout betrayal at any sensible exit means if Remainers are going to have to put up with the same old crap from the no deal death cult then I’d rather have that with the UK still in the EU.