Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Not if but when should Ed back an EU referendum?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Not if but when should Ed back an EU referendum?
Labour is signed up to an EU referendum in principle. Any new shift in powers will lead to one. That’s just a matter of time. Surely it’s better to take control and choose on your own terms and your own timing?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
"The UK's population is set to increase to over 70 million by 2028."
So what would be the GDP growth needed to not be going backwards?
The big winners would be the Lib Dems who are the only party united in wanting to stay in and nothing could be less in labour's interest at the moment than bringing that moribund party back to life
Henry, I agree that Miliband calling for a referendum immediately after a successful 2014 European election result for Ukip would look as though he was bounced into it, but there is nothing to prevent him waiting until closer to May 2015 imo.
However, whether Ed decides to go sooner or later, I would hope his decision was based entirely on a sense of conviction and what is good for the country, rather than simple party political gain.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10450836/Ed-Miliband-urged-to-act-over-new-phantom-members-in-Falkirk-scandal.html
are the LDs in favor of a referendum? I thought this was no longer policy.
The other aspect of autumn referendum next year is that it would clash with the Scots referendum. If the Scots vote to stay in the Union, then they would be part of the UK referendum, and probably more pro EU than English voters.
If the Scots vote for independence then they should have an entirely separate referendum to rUK on the EU. I can see that a rUK EU referendum being easier for BOO to win.
Either way, the Scots need to decide what they are doing first. This does tend to push an EU referendum to 2015 at the earliest.
I think the polling shift to a more even split over the EU leaves the outcome quite uncertain, probably reflecting the passing of the Euro crisis, or at least it fading from the news.
Iain Martin writing in the Telegraph: - David Cameron has played a blinder on the Scottish referendum –“Sensitive souls and Ukip supporters (always keen to dish out the personal abuse to opponents but not very good at taking the mildest criticism) might care to look away now or go straight to the comments at the bottom of this post.”
Arf.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100245974/david-cameron-has-played-a-blinder-on-the-scottish-referendum/#disqus_thread
In any case, how could the electorate trust Ed to stick to his promise?
If Len McCluskey can't trust Ed, who can?
Apparently, many “Labour insiders” are asking the same question, according to Dan the Man.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100245896/as-the-falkirk-scandal-spreads-labour-insiders-are-saying-you-cant-trust-ed-miliband/
So he ends up either arguing that he doesn't want a renegotiation, in which case he has to fight the election campaign defending the proposition that the EU is great and can't be improved, or he gets into a unicorn-promising contest with Cameron. The difference between what the unlucky election winner promises and what they'll actually be able to deliver will be horrible for their popularity, and quite possibly results in leaving the EU to boot, in which case their entire administration is spent in Brussels arguing about fish.
Much better to hold the line and say no to the whole thing, because Jobs.
Lab - 40%
Con - 32%
Ukip - 13%
L Dem 10%
I BLAME FALKIRK!!!!
App = -24 (-29)
Is lead by people of real ability:
71% of Cons think the Cons are:
41% of Labour think Labour are
40% of LDs think LDs are
Kind of society it wants broadly same as me: +4 (+3)
Led by people of real ability: -8 (-2)
Leaders take tough decisions: -31 (-)
Chop & change all the time: +7 (-)
That is a very different thing from the people alleged to have been joined up without their knowledge.
Support for the EU is one of the main tenets of LibDemism. It's very hard to see them actually wanting a referendum at a time when the Eurozone economies are screwed and everyone is narked off, let alone with a vague promise of renegotiation hanging around that'll deliver far too little to impress the sceptics, but maybe just enough to demotivate the philes. If Ed Miliband holds firm this should be one of his main advantages in the event of a kingmaker-zone Hung Parliament.
BMA negotiators later admitted the terms, which brought average GP incomes to more than £100,000 were so generous that they thought the Government was “having a laugh”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10450706/New-GP-contract-heralds-return-of-proper-doctors.html
Or perhaps you qualify more for the Urban dictionary definition of a spinner - might keep you better occupied and gain more popularity with the prospect of monetary reward.
"I think the Conservative Party is wrong to be flirting with exit from the European Union," Mr Clegg told the BBC.
"Hundreds of thousands, millions of jobs depend on our place in what is the world's largest borderless single market."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24859102
Good point. – After a quick trawl, there appears to be no concrete declaration made by Clegg as yet.
The only relevant comment I’ve found is from last month, where he said: “The Liberal Democrats believe it will be far better to have the referendum when a serious change to Europe’s rules, affecting the UK, next arises.”
Sounds as if he’s against an in/out referendum per se, unless necessitated by EU changes, which brings the referendum lock into play. – If anyone knows differently, happy to be corrected.
Four-time Indycar champion Dario Franchitti is retiring on health grounds. He fractured his spine in a crash at Houston last month, and doctors have told him that driving again is too risky.
One of the all-time great drivers on the US circuit. He should really have got a full-time F1 drive.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/motorsport/24950798
(The big giveaway is when you discover who Martin's "source" was. Ho ho.)
*chortle*
There's also no point since, although Cameron's own backbench MPs clearly don't trust Cammie's Cast Iron pledges, they are hardly about to believe little Ed's posturing either.
Nor are the kippers about to trust any of them including a great many eurosceptic backbench tories as kippers basically don't believe anyone who is in favour of staying IN Europe is really a eurosceptic at all.
Nobody seriously cares what the lib dems think. They are going to get slaughtered at the EU elections. Not only is calamity Clegg toxic but his toxicity is making the lib dem brand as toxic as he is. Hence the amusing yougov polling showing the lib dems are currently even more toxic than the tories.
In practice this means that any BOO referendum would be post May 2015 election.
I know that you Labour types like to assume that Scotland is "your" territory, but the fact is that the playing field has shifted in the last ten years.
On your second point, it is very clear to anyone with half a brain (so, that excludes the vast majority of PB Tories) that the Fopocracy is failing to connect with the English C1C2s that were the key to Thatcher and Major winning majorities. The Fopocracy just cannot win a majority without clerical workers' and skilled working-class support. The problem is that Cameron types just can't stand or understand those kinds of people. ie. normal people.
This EU referendum stuff is pure spin Stuart. It's usually wheeled out by a Blairite or two every month or so to try and panic the tories and just as swiftly gets forgotten. The tories don't need any help to run about like headless chickens over Europe and if anything talk of labour trying to stir things up usually unites them temporarily.
I know that Miliband could be accused of living in the London bubble, but not oor Henry!
What does he think a Miliband government should do? Sit and contemplate it's magnificent inheritance in awe? In fairness that largely worked for Blair until Iraq but it does seem a bit greedy.
It is the job of oppositions to oppose.
I'm always amazed by governing parties that behave like oppositions and wonder why the opposition is not governing very well. You Tories act as though you do not really want to be in government.
You may not agree with many of the decisions this Coalition has taken (I don't agree with all of them myself) but they are governing.
The SNP in Scotland have been fond of not frightening the horses either with make weight activity of moving the bureaucratic deckchairs around rather than doing much to make Scotland more competitive but they are understandably focussed on the referendum to the exclusion of almost all else. Unlike Henry it would appear!
Nontheless I am pro BOO referendum. Like Scottish independence it needs a referendum that can settle the issue, though like Scotland a tight result for either side may just set the hare running again.
2017 after possible renegotion (and probably clarity on the Euro crises and possible EU expansion) sounds about right. There would be time for both sides to set out their positions.
Actually as a Scot I don't have free schools. Mine costs me about £10K a child a year which is very far from free. But the alternatives are just awful and completely in the grip of producer interests.
The deficit is already down by 1/3 and the forward projections will look much better when we get the Winter statement.
Another 2,000 people employed yesterday and another 500+ off the unemployment register. Isn't it great?
If you don't like it go start your own blog.
You don't think voter's perception of Ed's trustworthiness is relevant to elections & popularity?
If Len McCluskey can't trust Ed - who can?
I have a feeling pigs will fly first - with such a huge poll lead he wont need to.
you've both hit the nail on the head, there's just no way a Euroref can be sensibly squeezed into this Parlt. A Euroref would influence the Indyref and probably the wrong way from Labour's POV, and to do it in early 2015 when everybody's in full GE mode just isn't going to happen.
Whether or not the UK would then get thrown out of the EU is a matter of conjecture. The EU might refuse to pay our MEPs - no great loss there.
Also we would not get any money back for CAP or low GDP areas support, but think of all the civil servants we would not need (and save millions on salaries) who send years and years poring of reams of regulations deciding what or who is valid for one of these grants. Send them all for retraining.
Of course if this was done before the EU2014 election then that would put Salmond in another quandry. The PC in Wales have not yet got to that level of thinking.
Chris Deerin@chrisdeerin8h
Question Time goes to Falkirk in a fortnight. They'd better issue stab-proof vests.
O/T: I wonder if current British politicians appreciate how pissed off the Continental leaders are about perceived Anglo-American cooperation in spying on their leaders. There was a leader in the Frankfurter Allgemeine (seriously pro-Merkel , pro-business) a couple of days ago pouring scorn on the rumours of a "no spy" agreement stopping the practice on German soil - the British and Americans should just end spying on friends on anyone's soil, full stop. Their perception is that we are absolutely in it with the Americans.
It's the Tories ability to convince their UKIP defectors that they are the only real route to a referendum is at the heart of the Tories eventual performance in 2015.
What bits of Lansleys bill are being dropped by this new GP deal?
To me it sounds like elderly patients are going to have a named Dr responsible for their care, which doesnt sound like it contradicts the Lansley bill.
Genuine question!
Heart's content.
Mr. Brooke and Mr. Dickson are entirely correct. If an EU referendum is held pre-Scottish referendum then that will both massively influence the Scottish vote but also enable people who may stop being citizens of the UK within a year or so to dictate the future destiny of the country they'll shortly be leaving.
If the referendum is held after the Scottish vote but before the next General Election then although it won't alter the Scottish result the timeframe will be so narrow as to make it impossible to properly explore the issues.
Still, Mr. Manson is right (although he didn't quite use this terminology) that Labour has recent history of blatant deceit when it comes to the EU (including on a referendum) and Miliband has very recent history of playing party politics on foreign policy. If he'll do that over Syria there's no reason he would be afraid of being equally partisan and full of shit over the EU.
Since when have leaders of countries not spied on one-another? "No spy" agreements are for public consumption and for politicians who want to spout morality and honesty publicly.
Yet in the world of the dark arts and diplomacy it has always gone on and will continue to do so - forewarned is always forearmed. Just read the despatches (often in Latin) from the Venetian Ambassador at the Court of Elizabeth I to understand why he was there.
I do not understand why nobody has not done that before - all want a bit of the gravy train I suppose.
Breaking the law is not a problem, France, Italy, Greece and Spain - among others - do it all the time and all fines imposed by the EU are just ignored without any recriminations from the EU.
For example they are expecting a big swing in their favour from gay voters - surely you remember Charles telling us that gay marriage legalisation had given them 'permission' to vote Conservative. Add in others who have been given 'permission' to vote Conservative through increasing overseas aid, subsidising windmills and approving HS2 and an unstoppable electoral force is being built.
You do this all the time: You do not know what is happening. You have done no analysis. Yet you anchor yourself onto an article and shout "See, I'm right", without understanding one jot what you think you're right about, or even if you are correct.
You did it earlier in the week with the computer weekly article, and were wrong.
Still, any smear will do, won't it?
http://bma.org.uk/news-views-analysis/general-practice-contract
thanks, some detail. But it doesn't exactly look like the end of the NHS.
Any thoughts on ‘Anglo-American’ cooperation’ wrt rendition flights during your time in Government?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/22/uk-support-cia-rendition-flights
And no, I doubt if the Germans are trying to tap Cameron's phone, whatever they might have done in medieval (or indeed Nazi) times. Leaving aside ethics, it's a stupid thing to do, like bugging your house to see if your spouse says something naughty about you, since the downside when you're caught outweighs the upside in picking up whatever is said. Naturally we should try to bug Al Qu'aeda leaders, but allies? Nah.
"...Americans in sleazy activity against our partners, and it confirms the sterotypes about us, like the barely-denied allegations about collusion over rendition. (How likely is it that we try to bug the White House? Not very.) That's OK for those who'd rather we were the 51st state than part of Europe..."
Americans - neutral, neither warm nor cold, but the sleazy mention clearly slants it negatively.
'our partners' - these aren't Europeans or Germans/Frenchmen. They're partners, because we're warm and snuggly together.
51st state than part of Europe - The Choice: enslavement to the US or membership of a continent. Wrong in two ways: firstly, the EU dicks us about, costs us more and forces more legislation upon us than the US by several orders of magnitude. Secondly, we're part of Europe in a geographical sense but Europe and the EU are separate entities. Europe's lovely, the EU is horrid.
There's nothing wrong (democracy and common sense aside) with being so pro-EU, but for you to suggest others are too pro-American when you and your party are slavishly pro-EU, which has far more negative consequences for us, is blinkered.
British people basically accept the claim that was made by Britain’s intelligence chiefs when they testified before Parliament last week. The spooks argued that they are working to protect democracy. That claim, which would be met with derision in Germany or by much of liberal America, is broadly accepted in Britain, for reasons that are deeply rooted in British history.
http://blogs.ft.com/the-world/2013/11/why-the-british-like-their-spies/
“The German, French and Spanish governments have reacted angrily to reports based on National Security Agency (NSA) files leaked by Snowden since June, revealing the interception of communications by tens of millions of their citizens each month. US intelligence officials have insisted the mass monitoring was carried out by the security agencies in the countries involved and shared with the US.”
Countries spy - sometimes on other countries, certainly on their own people and often in collusion with other foreign agencies – but they all spy. (except the Italians, which can’t get their act together apparently )
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/01/gchq-europe-spy-agencies-mass-surveillance-snowden
Interesting.
Average vote shares at the 4 by-elections held on 14 Nov were: LAB 31.35%, #UKIP 26.65%, CON 20.33%. LDEMs stood in only 3 (av. vote 6.9%).
UKIP rising!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24946089
Parts of Didcot Power station being moved off to Germany.
Whether that says more about UK public's attitude to crackpot science or just towards Ed Davey is to be determined.
And no, I don't think that the Germans or the French are likely to be attempting to bug Cameron's phone. If they are, then that too should be resisted. There's a big difference between intelligence/diplomatic assessments (fine), attempts to pick up industrial tips by legal means (fine) and behaving like crooks with people whose support we want (not a good idea). My point, though, was that I'm not sure British politicians realise how much damage it's doing to our public image abroad. If they realise it and don't care, that's different.
Incidentally, one of the amusing stories that came out about the Irish peace talks was the crisis when the IRA discovered we were bugging Adams's car (which was indeed only to be expected). He immediately called Downing Street and choreography was agreed - the IRA would declare themselves shocked, we'd refuse to comment, and everyone would move on. It was one of the little bits of cooperation that persuaded Downing Street that Adams was now serious about peace.
It also would give "out" a much higher chance of winning - which is probably the reason Mili won't come out for it.
At present with an 8 pt lead he doesn't have to - his problem is that the closer to the election he changes his mind the less people will believe him - apparently there is a problem with trust wrt Mr Miliband..
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/herald-view/salmonds-treble-chance.22691859
As for Ed's referendum, well... they say the tories go for sex and labour goes for money, so what gives Ed the maximum income for The Party and his projects? Gordon kept us out as much as he could to protect the cashflow so he could spend, spend, spend - and "do in" the evil tories.
Anyway, enough for now...
Bev.