Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.
Maybe we could - if so many people hadn't been telling them at the time how naive they were being.
You were all too busy ramping the joys of the EU as I recall.
It was certainly a joy not having to deal with the idiocy of Brexit every day. What a golden age the world before June 2016 was.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
When
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.
I assume that's posted in irony but on the off-chance it's not, Vote Leave consistently criticised the EU for putting ideology and politics ahead of pragmatism, the economy and subsidiarity. Of all the people involved, they have least scope to complain about how the EU has acted.
Besides, there is a deal.
A deal that's been rejected 3 times by parliament.
1. I think immediately jumping to that conclusion is probably not wise.
2. Given that every other post-2010 left wing yoof polemicist has (a) over egged the pudding and (b) been caught out, OJ will be in a minority if he's being completely truthful here.
On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
The world enters recession, a consequence of the natural stage of the economic cycle we are in, and the Trump trade wars. Britain does not sign an FTA with the US, because it turns out that British and American farmers do not share a common vision.
Our exports splutter (mostly due to the world economy, but excarbated by No Deal Brexit), and - thanks to already overstretched consumers and close to zero interest rates - there is much less room to get people spending than previously. UK house prices fall, thanks to lack of demand from immigrating foreigners and rising unemployment at home.
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.
I presume you are talking England and Wales and that whilst not mentioned Scotland is independent and in the EU. Given no mention that voters would have split 4 ways otherwise.
David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech: - Free university tuition - Renationalisation of key industries - "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.
That might be the intention. I wonder whether it'd be politically sustainable once campaigns that put real numbers on how much the policy "steals from your pension" start?
Ha, they'll just say the sort of nonsense that all politicians come out with. "We'll give those greedy big businesses a long overdue kicking, whilst simultaneously doing no harm whatsoever to your private pensions".
Comrade Corbyn will be generous with the undeserved wealth that will be seized from the capitalists and used to furnish the proletariat with joy unbounded!
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.
I think that IS the plan but I don't see it being possible by 31 Oct. An extension into 2020 will be agreed, I think. I am not persuaded by 'Do or Die!" - but luckily for Boris, most people do appear to be.
Boris is not at all interested in doing a deal. If he was, DExEU would have already published detailed, legally-drafted proposals for the revisions to the WA that they want, to enable discussion and agreement. Where are they?
The political strategy is to leave without a deal but to blame others for the negative consequences of that outcome, while taking credit for having delivered on the promise.
No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.
Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight. The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
What an utter shambles.
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.
When
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.
I assume that's posted in irony but on the off-chance it's not, Vote Leave consistently criticised the EU for putting ideology and politics ahead of pragmatism, the economy and subsidiarity. Of all the people involved, they have least scope to complain about how the EU has acted.
Besides, there is a deal.
A deal that's been rejected 3 times by parliament.
The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?
Where is the national debt?
Coming down, as a share of GDP.
But Labour can't criticise both that the deficit reduction was too slow ("debt is too high"), and that it was too fast ("austerity!!"). They do need to get their story straight.
David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech: - Free university tuition - Renationalisation of key industries - "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.
That might be the intention. I wonder whether it'd be politically sustainable once campaigns that put real numbers on how much the policy "steals from your pension" start?
Ha, they'll just say the sort of nonsense that all politicians come out with. "We'll give those greedy big businesses a long overdue kicking, whilst simultaneously doing no harm whatsoever to your private pensions".
There does seem to be tacit agreement amongst the two biggest Parties that economic realities shall be ignored for the time being.
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed. Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.
Why? Boris has stated that we leave on October 31st so Boris is going to have to find more than a fig leaf for Labour and co to vote for it...
No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?
Where is the national debt?
Coming down, as a share of GDP.
But Labour can't criticise both that the deficit reduction was too slow ("debt is too high"), and that it was too fast ("austerity!!"). They do need to get their story straight.
Austerity was not necessary to bring the deficit down, and may have hindered it. Economic growth is what was needed.
"The record-low mortgage rates, which don’t take into account the fees that homeowners pay their banks, are the latest reflection of the global shift in the monetary environment as central banks delay plans to remove stimulus amid concerns about economic growth."
I think they're negative - as previously stated they were talking about it on the World Service last night , where they warned that Asset prices could drop being your worry
The Danish mortgage market works very differently to the UK one. All mortgages there are packaged up into bonds and sold onto the open market. (In fact, it is a legal requirement of mortgage lender that they sell them on.)
So the way it works is that you turn up at your local mortgage bank, and they agree a mortgage with you. It is then packaged with other mortgages of similar rating, and immediately sold at auction.
Now, when people are particularly pessimistic, bond yields on some mortgage bonds - even at auction - can go negative. But this is very different to someone getting a negative interest rate on their debt. If the bank charged you what it sold the mortgage bonds for it would make a substantial loss. It has to originate the loan, it has to service the loan, and it takes all the costs in the event of forclosure.
Not only that, but in most cases the customer doesn't actually care what the bond is sold for. You see, the bank charges you (say) 1% on your mortgage. Those 1% bonds are then auctioned off. If investors pay (say) 112 for your package of bonds yielding 1%, then they are getting a negative yield. That is very different from the end customer paying a negative yield.
From the article:
“During this week’s auctions, there were three times when I had to stand back a little from the screen and raise my eyebrows somewhat,” said Jeppe Borre, who analyzes the mortgage-bond market from a unit of the Nykredit group that dominates Denmark’s $450 billion home-loan industry.
For one-year adjustable-rate mortgage bonds, Nykredit’s refinancing auctions resulted in a negative rate of 0.23%. The three-year rate was minus 0.28%, while the five-year rate was minus 0.04%.
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.
I think that IS the plan but I don't see it being possible by 31 Oct. An extension into 2020 will be agreed, I think. I am not persuaded by 'Do or Die!" - but luckily for Boris, most people do appear to be.
Boris is not at all interested in doing a deal. If he was, DExEU would have already published detailed, legally-drafted proposals for the revisions to the WA that they want, to enable discussion and agreement. Where are they?
The political strategy is to leave without a deal but to blame others for the negative consequences of that outcome, while taking credit for having delivered on the promise.
Or, alternatively, deflect the blame if leaving is prevented by the actions of others.
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed. Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained.
This is very disingenuous. You can't turn around after 3 years during which Madam May eschewed any attempt at consensus or compromise and then hector the Labour Party for not suddenly jumping on her ship.
Look to your own house. The nut job ERG are responsible for the failure of her Brexit plan. If they'd have all supported it, it would have passed.
The problem for the Tories now is that the "Corbyn's magic money-tree" argument holds less persuasion when your own party advocates fully rogering large sections of the economy on the insane altar of a no-deal Brexit
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'
Anything wrong with that?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
The trouble is Parliament has decided that it doesn't want to sort that one out.
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.
What about people that have a degree and have paid their loan off in full ?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.
Of course you can leg it to avoid your debts, but it's not really a great plan long term, and I don't think many people would leave to avoid paying a bit more tax.
No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.
OK then, the parents of graduates with loans to repay won't be very happy that their children are still having to repay when new students get tuition fees paid. But no doubt Labour will write tuition fee loans off - for the Many not the Few!
FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'
Anything wrong with that?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!!!!
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'
Anything wrong with that?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
Agreed. And if it cannot, you have a General Election to change Parliament.
"The record-low mortgage rates, which don’t take into account the fees that homeowners pay their banks, are the latest reflection of the global shift in the monetary environment as central banks delay plans to remove stimulus amid concerns about economic growth."
I think they're negative - as previously stated they were talking about it on the World Service last night , where they warned that Asset prices could drop being your worry
The Danish mortgage market works very differently to the UK one. All mortgages there are packaged up into bonds and sold onto the open market. (In fact, it is a legal requirement of mortgage lender that they sell them on.)
So the way it works is that you turn up at your local mortgage bank, and they agree a mortgage with you. It is then packaged with other mortgages of similar rating, and immediately sold at auction.
Now, when people are particularly pessimistic, bond yields on some mortgage bonds - even at auction - can go negative. But this is very different to someone getting a negative interest rate on their debt. If the bank charged you what it sold the mortgage bonds for it would make a substantial loss. It has to originate the loan, it has to service the loan, and it takes all the costs in the event of forclosure.
Not only that, but in most cases the customer doesn't actually care what the bond is sold for. You see, the bank charges you (say) 1% on your mortgage. Those 1% bonds are then auctioned off. If investors pay (say) 112 for your package of bonds yielding 1%, then they are getting a negative yield. That is very different from the end customer paying a negative yield.
From the article:
“During this week’s auctions, there were three times when I had to stand back a little from the screen and raise my eyebrows somewhat,” said Jeppe Borre, who analyzes the mortgage-bond market from a unit of the Nykredit group that dominates Denmark’s $450 billion home-loan industry.
For one-year adjustable-rate mortgage bonds, Nykredit’s refinancing auctions resulted in a negative rate of 0.23%. The three-year rate was minus 0.28%, while the five-year rate was minus 0.04%.
Okay - apparently you have more knowledge than me. Second time I've been caught out by late night World Service listening.
David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech: - Free university tuition - Renationalisation of key industries - "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.
That might be the intention. I wonder whether it'd be politically sustainable once campaigns that put real numbers on how much the policy "steals from your pension" start?
It won't steal from state sector pensions and Labour/Socialist Worker believes that state employees are the only employees who matter. Anyone in the private sector can go fu*k themselves.
Boris surely needs to have something eye catching on tuition fees.
Graduate tax is far more presentable - I'm surprised Govt hasn't moved to this in the last two years. I know they're doing a review but they've been far too slow.
Boris is going to have to address this quickly now. At a minimum he'll need clear, easy to understand proposals in Con manifesto.
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed. Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained.
This is very disingenuous. You can't turn around after 3 years during which Madam May eschewed any attempt at consensus or compromise and then hector the Labour Party for not suddenly jumping on her ship.
Look to your own house. The nut job ERG are responsible for the failure of her Brexit plan. If they'd have all supported it, it would have passed.
No problem. This is all also true. As a centrist moderate that's all obvious. The difference is that the ERG - wrong as they are - voted how they believed. Labour leavers are not content to crash out and made sure TMs deal didn't go through for party political reasons. I think ERG believed they were serving the national interest (though they are IMO wrong), many Labour MPs knew they were not.
FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
If people voted to leave would it not also be reasonable for them to expect to leave on the basis that the leave campaigns promised? How is it any more "democratic" to ask people to vote leave on the basis that there would be a deal only to turn round and try to take us out of the EU without a deal?
Both No deal and revoke need the legitimacy of a seconded referendum if they are to have a proper mandate. Leaving with a deal is the only route that doesn't.
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'
Anything wrong with that?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
Which it can't so the default position should be status quo/remain, or another referendum that defines what sort of Leave the 52% thought they were voting for. If those in favour of Brexit really did believe in democracy they would agree to this.
FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'
Anything wrong with that?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!!!!
Labour’s policy was to Brexit in accordance with Vote Leave’s promises.
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.
You will only be allowed to take £20 in cash out of the country
Boris surely needs to have something eye catching on tuition fees.
Graduate tax is far more presentable - I'm surprised Govt hasn't moved to this in the last two years. I know they're doing a review but they've been far too slow.
Boris is going to have to address this quickly now. At a minimum he'll need clear, easy to understand proposals in Con manifesto.
I assume Nick Timothy or Fiona Hill won't be let anywhere near the manifesto this time ?
If we could hook Boris and Corbyn up to lie detectors I expect that we would discover that Corbyn is keener on hard Brexit than Boris.
You would probably find Boris is less keen on any kind of Brexit than Dominic Grieve! We would see a complete volte face if Boris thought it would lose him the leadership
FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
We c are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'
Anything wrong with that?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.
The counter to this is that everyone ends up paying to give these particular students an advantage in life. And yes, some degrees have a value to society that is worthy of the investment. But there are too many that don't.
I want everyone to get a degree if that is appropriate for them - but the cost should not entirely be on the state.
Boris surely needs to have something eye catching on tuition fees.
Graduate tax is far more presentable - I'm surprised Govt hasn't moved to this in the last two years. I know they're doing a review but they've been far too slow.
Boris is going to have to address this quickly now. At a minimum he'll need clear, easy to understand proposals in Con manifesto.
I assume Nick Timothy or Fiona Hill won't be let anywhere near the manifesto this time ?
No, someone far worse, and his name is Dominic and his Cummings are all over Boris's manifesto
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).
No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
Mr. Punter, it remains odd that Cameron never had the official Leave campaign put forward a basic framework (ie leaving the customs union and so on). It would've been eminently sensible *and* helped his own side.
That said, we are where we are. And that's, post-result, due to delinquent MPs voting in perverse ways.
FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!
We c are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'
Anything wrong with that?
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a religion, only much less rational, and without all the laughs
"The record-low mortgage rates, which don’t take into account the fees that homeowners pay their banks, are the latest reflection of the global shift in the monetary environment as central banks delay plans to remove stimulus amid concerns about economic growth."
I think they're negative - as previously stated they were talking about it on the World Service last night , where they warned that Asset prices could drop being your worry
The Danish mortgage market works very differently to the UK one. All mortgages there are packaged up into bonds and sold onto the open market. (In fact, it is a legal requirement of mortgage lender that they sell them on.)
So the way it works is that you turn up at your local mortgage bank, and they agree a mortgage with you. It is then packaged with other mortgages of similar rating, and immediately sold at auction.
Now, when people are particularly pessimistic, bond yields on some mortgage bonds - even at auction - can go negative. But this is very different to someone getting a negative interest rate on their debt. If the bank charged you what it sold the mortgage bonds for it would make a substantial loss. It has to originate the loan, it has to service the loan, and it takes all the costs in the event of forclosure.
Not only that, but in most cases the customer doesn't actually care what the bond is sold for. You see, the bank charges you (say) 1% on your mortgage. Those 1% bonds are then auctioned off. If investors pay (say) 112 for your package of bonds yielding 1%, then they are getting a negative yield. That is very different from the end customer paying a negative yield.
From the article:
“During this week’s auctions, there were three times when I had to stand back a little from the screen and raise my eyebrows somewhat,” said Jeppe Borre, who analyzes the mortgage-bond market from a unit of the Nykredit group that dominates Denmark’s $450 billion home-loan industry.
For one-year adjustable-rate mortgage bonds, Nykredit’s refinancing auctions resulted in a negative rate of 0.23%. The three-year rate was minus 0.28%, while the five-year rate was minus 0.04%.
Okay - apparently you have more knowledge than me. Second time I've been caught out by late night World Service listening.
I have just done this and the idea the "kurs" (bond price) doesn't matter is incorrect - I remortgaged at 1% fixed for 30 years instead of 0.5% because when I borrow I have to sell the bonds - if the bonds are only being sold at 95 then I have to sell more to raise the correct money for the mortgage whereas on the 1% loan I got 99.98 - I have to buy them back at 100 still. There is a fee on top of the nominal mortgage rate for the management etc. I found the whole process baffling at first but this unique system works well.
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).
Exactly, Politicians have deliberately disrespected the referendum result whilst claiming that they are not. They cannot be allowed to get away with doing this. It is a complete affront to democracy.
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.
You will only be allowed to take £20 in cash out of the country
Brexiteers have a plan for that
Leaving the country avoids the loan repayment too.
David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech: - Free university tuition - Renationalisation of key industries - "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.
Is this what now passes for political debate ? We’re arguing about which of two lying arses is slightly less mendacious and irresponsible.
Mr. Punter, it remains odd that Cameron never had the official Leave campaign put forward a basic framework (ie leaving the customs union and so on). It would've been eminently sensible *and* helped his own side.
That said, we are where we are. And that's, post-result, due to delinquent MPs voting in perverse ways.
He really didn't think it through very well, did he.
I always thought he was on the whole a pretty decent PM, but my word he got that one wrong.
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
Always party before country for Labour. Always.
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).
There is not the slightest plausible evidence that the government is seeking a deal. Far from it: it is trashing the only deal that is currently available and making no steps to identify an alternative one.
There is no mandate for no deal. And since there is no mandate for no deal, a new mandate is required if the government is to lead the country down that path.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
Always party before country for Labour. Always.
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.
I think 17.4 million people may well be more responsible.
Mr. Icarus, makes the Varadkar position all the dafter.
"We must have the backstop, which will prevent a hard border. Although it hasn't passed the Commons, and without a deal, there will be a hard border."
Mr. Punter, he was complacent, which to a large extent I can understand (I always thought Remain would win 60/40 at a canter). That said, it was a very obvious step.
Mr. Meeks, let's assume for the sake of argument you're right about the lack of mandate for no deal (that's open to debate): what would you see as the optimal route in the Commons being?
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
Always party before country for Labour. Always.
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.
I think May at the end genuinely was putting country before party. The 30 or so Labour backbenchers who (Who knows ?) support the deal should probably have compromised at that point (MV3). Clegg certainly put country above party when it came to the 2010-15 ministry. Johnson won't.
No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.
Yeah maybe on PB. In the real world I think you'll find most people are just BOB (bored of Brexit)
No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
Now what?
It means that however long it takes at some point, somewhere, an irresistible force meets an immovable object.
That is exactly why this drama is so compelling. It has the element I mentioned, + it is essentially non-violent and democratic, and it touches vital interests.
Compare this with the stultifying epic of Hong Kong where there is an irresistible force but no countervailing immovable object, just heroic people who may be the object of pitiless terror at some point when there is nothing we can do about it.
Suppose, counterfactually, the USA said to China 'If you move in Hong Kong we regard it as an act of war and will attack' it would then generate the sort of passion that irresistible force/immovable object issues get.
Mr. Meeks, let's assume for the sake of argument you're right about the lack of mandate for no deal (that's open to debate): what would you see as the optimal route in the Commons being?
Extend the Article 50 notice to the end of the year and hold a general election, where all parties can set out their wares on what to do next about Brexit.
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
They don't want it, but the consequences are relatively small for them. Of course if it is really true that No Deal won't be that bad for us, think how inconsequential it will be for them!
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
Public opinion may not see it that way
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
Now what?
If the WA gets approved, what are we implementing up to 31st Dec 2020?
David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech: - Free university tuition - Renationalisation of key industries - "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.
Is this what now passes for political debate ? We’re arguing about which of two lying arses is slightly less mendacious and irresponsible.
In for a non-existent penny, in for a non-existent pound.
If both parties are using 1 or more magic money trees then neither will really be able to do much to criticise the other over it. Maybe lib dems can get some mileage by portraying themselves as the only ones with a fully costed manifesto.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.
Yeah maybe on PB. In the real world I think you'll find most people are just BOB (bored of Brexit)
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.
Yeah maybe on PB. In the real world I think you'll find most people are just BOB (bored of Brexit)
In my real world too, Brisk, but that doesn't mean they will be bored with the consequences.
Mr. Meeks, let's assume for the sake of argument you're right about the lack of mandate for no deal (that's open to debate): what would you see as the optimal route in the Commons being?
Extend the Article 50 notice to the end of the year and hold a general election, where all parties can set out their wares on what to do next about Brexit.
I have a strange feeling that if 'Leave with no deal' won the GE with say 41% of the vote (which in current circumstances could be a crushing victory) it would not quite end the discussion, including with Mr Meeks! (And it would be very dull if it did).
David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech: - Free university tuition - Renationalisation of key industries - "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.
It is called MMT - Modern Monetary Theory. If Corbyn wins then UK will be the testing laboratory for this new idea*, which basically involves printing money. US may follow if Dems win.
* Well, they say 'new' but I have a vague sense I've seen this one before.
Mayor Pete was quite good on the deficit these last couple of days. If he carries on like that he'll have no chance.
But I fear you may be right. It's that long since Britain's had proper inflation that the threat of its return may well be wished away as scaremongering or at the least, downplayed far too far.
"But the MMT people are just wrong in believing that the only question you need to ask about the budget deficit is whether it supplies the right amount of aggregate demand; financeability matters too, even with fiat money."
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
Public opinion may not see it that way
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
How does a transition period work - it's a hard and fast separation to WTO tariffs on the EU's side (because they have to).
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
Always party before country for Labour. Always.
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.
I think May at the end genuinely was putting country before party. The 30 or so Labour backbenchers who (Who knows ?) support the deal should probably have compromised at that point (MV3). Clegg certainly put country above party when it came to the 2010-15 ministry. Johnson won't.
From the Book of Johnson:Greater self-love has no man than this; that he should back-stab his friends for his career
British MPs have voted in stupid ways, contrary to what the majority of them actually want.
That said, the EU has seen the 'deal' fail three times and refuse to change anything.
Mr. Meeks, interesting, though it's entirely possible we'd end up with an even more hung Parliament (if one views hungness as a spectrum rather than a binary state that's present or absent).
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
+1 I enjoyed a mini-break in NI last week. But some people like sun and more heat. I like holidaying in the UK but come November i am going to the Canary islands for the slightly longer daylight hours and the latent warmth of summer defusing from the seas.
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
Public opinion may not see it that way
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
Hang on, they need us more than we need them, shurely!! Project fear I tell you.
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).
There is not the slightest plausible evidence that the government is seeking a deal. Far from it: it is trashing the only deal that is currently available and making no steps to identify an alternative one.
There is no mandate for no deal. And since there is no mandate for no deal, a new mandate is required if the government is to lead the country down that path.
Where was the obsession with "mandate" when the government of the day ratified Lisbon without a manifesto despite their manifesto pledging the opposite?
How come the issue about "mandate" only occurs when its an issue that worries you?
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
Public opinion may not see it that way
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
How does a transition period work - it's a hard and fast separation to WTO tariffs on the EU's side (because they have to).
Legally there can be no transition [ officially ] if there is no WA. Otherwise other WTO members could complain. But the UK is going to break WTO rules anyway as the official HMRC document states that trucks will be allowed in from the EU without any checks and shippers will have to lodge both duty and VAT paperwork afterwards [ much like we do today with INTRASTAT which only applies with trade volume and value ]
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
True for the 2016 referendum, but not as a general rule.
It's perfectly possible - indeed fairly common - to have a fully drafted piece of legislation and ask simply whether or not to sign the secondary legislation saying "this comes into effect on 1st January".
That obviously wasn't possible for the 2016 referendum, because the EU simply weren't going to negotiate a deal to leave on the basis Britain might leave - it'd be an awful waste of time and set a terrible precedent.
A second referendum could (and perhaps should) have been baked in from the start ("if you vote Leave, we'll negotiate and then put the Leave deal to you in a second referendum"). But Cameron didn't expect to lose, and also would have felt that such an arrangement would make a Leave vote more likely (and I suspect it would as it would have reduced the fear factor). And, given it wasn't baked in, I can see why Leavers now see it as sneaky whereas they'd probably have accepted it at the time.
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.
I have joined the "Shrug" Cult. These days I just shrug and say "Go on then... do it and see what happens" because, quite frankly, a lot of people only learn the hard way.
No one has ever answered me in even the slightest detail how putting up barriers to our major export market makes the UK richer, safer and better.
All I get is horsesh*t about how we can shiver in electric brownouts / blackouts but at least we will have our blue passports.
One complete fool on here even told me that "Yes - it may be a disaster, but at least we chose do to it"
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
Always party before country for Labour. Always.
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.
I think May at the end genuinely was putting country before party. The 30 or so Labour backbenchers who (Who knows ?) support the deal should probably have compromised at that point (MV3). Clegg certainly put country above party when it came to the 2010-15 ministry. Johnson won't.
Good but worrying examples, Pulpstar. Neither May nor Clegg reaped much reward for putting the Country first.
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).
There is not the slightest plausible evidence that the government is seeking a deal. Far from it: it is trashing the only deal that is currently available and making no steps to identify an alternative one.
There is no mandate for no deal. And since there is no mandate for no deal, a new mandate is required if the government is to lead the country down that path.
Where was the obsession with "mandate" when the government of the day ratified Lisbon without a manifesto despite their manifesto pledging the opposite?
How come the issue about "mandate" only occurs when its an issue that worries you?
Personally, i always critised Brown because he had no mandate. I critised May in 2016 and Boris now...
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..
Public opinion may not see it that way
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
How does a transition period work - it's a hard and fast separation to WTO tariffs on the EU's side (because they have to).
Legally there can be no transition [ officially ] if there is no WA. Otherwise other WTO members could complain. But the UK is going to break WTO rules anyway as the official HMRC document states that trucks will be allowed in from the EU without any checks and shippers will have to lodge both duty and VAT paperwork afterwards [ much like we do today with INTRASTAT which only applies with trade volume and value ]
Just because we ignore WTO rules doesn't mean the EU will. Heck it is advantageous for them to apply the rules to the latter just to ensure others don't have the same idea.
Comments
It's time to inact the 2016 referendum result.
Halloween Brexit it is.
1. I think immediately jumping to that conclusion is probably not wise.
2. Given that every other post-2010 left wing yoof polemicist has (a) over egged the pudding and (b) been caught out, OJ will be in a minority if he's being completely truthful here.
RIP Johann Hari, we barely knew ye
The political strategy is to leave without a deal but to blame others for the negative consequences of that outcome, while taking credit for having delivered on the promise.
But Labour can't criticise both that the deficit reduction was too slow ("debt is too high"), and that it was too fast ("austerity!!"). They do need to get their story straight.
So the way it works is that you turn up at your local mortgage bank, and they agree a mortgage with you. It is then packaged with other mortgages of similar rating, and immediately sold at auction.
Now, when people are particularly pessimistic, bond yields on some mortgage bonds - even at auction - can go negative. But this is very different to someone getting a negative interest rate on their debt. If the bank charged you what it sold the mortgage bonds for it would make a substantial loss. It has to originate the loan, it has to service the loan, and it takes all the costs in the event of forclosure.
Not only that, but in most cases the customer doesn't actually care what the bond is sold for. You see, the bank charges you (say) 1% on your mortgage. Those 1% bonds are then auctioned off. If investors pay (say) 112 for your package of bonds yielding 1%, then they are getting a negative yield. That is very different from the end customer paying a negative yield.
From the article:
“During this week’s auctions, there were three times when I had to stand back a little from the screen and raise my eyebrows somewhat,” said Jeppe Borre, who analyzes the mortgage-bond market from a unit of the Nykredit group that dominates Denmark’s $450 billion home-loan industry.
For one-year adjustable-rate mortgage bonds, Nykredit’s refinancing auctions resulted in a negative rate of 0.23%. The three-year rate was minus 0.28%, while the five-year rate was minus 0.04%.
Look to your own house. The nut job ERG are responsible for the failure of her Brexit plan. If they'd have all supported it, it would have passed.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
This will be spun by Johnson as a victory and one made possible by the strength of his leadership.
The time will then be used to apply lipstick to the pig and take it back to market.
Election in spring 2020 whether he gets a sale or not.
If the ERG are nuts, why are they and Labour of the same opinion regarding the deal?
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
Retrospective taxation of that nature would be a fantastic way to seriously irritate millions of people.
If they're making more due to their degree they'll pay a higher rate of tax. If they're not doing that well, they shouldn't be taxed more.
Graduate tax is far more presentable - I'm surprised Govt hasn't moved to this in the last two years. I know they're doing a review but they've been far too slow.
Boris is going to have to address this quickly now. At a minimum he'll need clear, easy to understand proposals in Con manifesto.
Both No deal and revoke need the legitimacy of a seconded referendum if they are to have a proper mandate. Leaving with a deal is the only route that doesn't.
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
I want everyone to get a degree if that is appropriate for them - but the cost should not entirely be on the state.
Now what?
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
That said, we are where we are. And that's, post-result, due to delinquent MPs voting in perverse ways.
We’re arguing about which of two lying arses is slightly less mendacious and irresponsible.
I always thought he was on the whole a pretty decent PM, but my word he got that one wrong.
There is no mandate for no deal. And since there is no mandate for no deal, a new mandate is required if the government is to lead the country down that path.
They had a choice and chose to leave
"We must have the backstop, which will prevent a hard border. Although it hasn't passed the Commons, and without a deal, there will be a hard border."
Mr. Punter, he was complacent, which to a large extent I can understand (I always thought Remain would win 60/40 at a canter). That said, it was a very obvious step.
Mr. Meeks, let's assume for the sake of argument you're right about the lack of mandate for no deal (that's open to debate): what would you see as the optimal route in the Commons being?
We need to be quick though, it wont last much longer!
That is exactly why this drama is so compelling. It has the element I mentioned, + it is essentially non-violent and democratic, and it touches vital interests.
Compare this with the stultifying epic of Hong Kong where there is an irresistible force but no countervailing immovable object, just heroic people who may be the object of pitiless terror at some point when there is nothing we can do about it.
Suppose, counterfactually, the USA said to China 'If you move in Hong Kong we regard it as an act of war and will attack' it would then generate the sort of passion that irresistible force/immovable object issues get.
Hardly worth negotiating over.....
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
If both parties are using 1 or more magic money trees then neither will really be able to do much to criticise the other over it. Maybe lib dems can get some mileage by portraying themselves as the only ones with a fully costed manifesto.
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/mmt-again/
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1163438149051322374
British MPs have voted in stupid ways, contrary to what the majority of them actually want.
That said, the EU has seen the 'deal' fail three times and refuse to change anything.
Mr. Meeks, interesting, though it's entirely possible we'd end up with an even more hung Parliament (if one views hungness as a spectrum rather than a binary state that's present or absent).
Things can always be worse.
How come the issue about "mandate" only occurs when its an issue that worries you?
It's perfectly possible - indeed fairly common - to have a fully drafted piece of legislation and ask simply whether or not to sign the secondary legislation saying "this comes into effect on 1st January".
That obviously wasn't possible for the 2016 referendum, because the EU simply weren't going to negotiate a deal to leave on the basis Britain might leave - it'd be an awful waste of time and set a terrible precedent.
A second referendum could (and perhaps should) have been baked in from the start ("if you vote Leave, we'll negotiate and then put the Leave deal to you in a second referendum"). But Cameron didn't expect to lose, and also would have felt that such an arrangement would make a Leave vote more likely (and I suspect it would as it would have reduced the fear factor). And, given it wasn't baked in, I can see why Leavers now see it as sneaky whereas they'd probably have accepted it at the time.
No one has ever answered me in even the slightest detail how putting up barriers to our major export market makes the UK richer, safer and better.
All I get is horsesh*t about how we can shiver in electric brownouts / blackouts but at least we will have our blue passports.
One complete fool on here even told me that "Yes - it may be a disaster, but at least we chose do to it"