I hope mps are successful in their campaign to stop no deal, not least because it would have a big boost to the currency just as I buy my US and Canadian dollars on the 9th September for our cruise a few days later, but also it is the right thing to do and I can retain my party membership
LOL
I did say it with tongue in cheek !!!!
Big G I hope you and Mrs Big G have a fantastic time away. Don't spend too much time on PB!
Thank you. It was good of Boris to prorogue Parliament for the time we are away
But seriously I do want the mps to succeed in stopping no deal
The PM, the Foreign Secretary and the Home Secretary voted against it. Indeed it was the PM and Foreign Secretary who sabotaged it - without bothering to even read the final text - and made it unpalatable to the country.
Forget the actions of others - are people not capable of reading the actual text and deciding for themselves. MPs in particular ?
That's what I did.
One of my biggest shocks in my whole life of being politically aware was just how few MPs seemed to have actually done this.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
I hope mps are successful in their campaign to stop no deal, not least because it would have a big boost to the currency just as I buy my US and Canadian dollars on the 9th September for our cruise a few days later, but also it is the right thing to do and I can retain my party membership
LOL
So as a member of the Tory party you want the opposition to sort out the mess your own party has created so you can profit from it.
I doubt you have ever moved moved tooling across borders. It happens all the time. The issue will be capacity in UK factories.
I worked on moving manufactured parts around the single market because there are no borders.
Erecting barriers between where the parts are manufactured, and where they are assembled, will not encourage the manufacturers to move to service fewer assembly lines
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
LOL
I dont remember agreeing that!
May was out of her depth and BoJo is a devious scumbag is more my recollectioin.
I hope mps are successful in their campaign to stop no deal, not least because it would have a big boost to the currency just as I buy my US and Canadian dollars on the 9th September for our cruise a few days later, but also it is the right thing to do and I can retain my party membership
LOL
So as a member of the Tory party you want the opposition to sort out the mess your own party has created so you can profit from it.
Give over. My comment was tongue in cheek. Everyone needs to chill a bit
There is an argument which has also been made on pb that BBC Scotland's output is not Scottish enough. You mention Dr Who, which is made in Wales but has no distinctly Welsh content. For some nationalists, it is a matter of more Taggart and Rebus, not access to Inspector Morse. The reality, as you imply, is not much will change.
Pretty sure for most 'nationalists' the problem with the BBC is that it's a bit shite, not that it's not Scottish enough. It would just be better if licence money paid here could be used to make more content here, whatever its flavour (Taggart & Rebus were both STV productions as it happens).
I think Ireland pay c.£20m p.a. for BBC content? Perfect solution for an Indy Scotland, once the rUK gets over its massive huff.
Er... M'lud, this Parliamentary session is virtually the longest on record and we want to present our exciting new legislation for the NHS and police to the Commons and to the British People in a Queens Speech in the same way thats happened hundreds and hundreds of times during the glorious reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
Honestly these people are just wasting everyone's time (and their own money) with this bullshit.
Just a little reminder of the NYT map of No Deal Brexit impact:
So - to answer my own question - and one which noone seems to ask any No Dealer on any interview I've ever heard - No Deal is far worse for us than for anyone else.
So how is threatening No Deal some sort of marvelous negotiating ploy for Britain?
It is, like everything else from Brexiters, a fail. Threatening No Deal will on the one hand frighten the EU so much that they will come begging to the negotiating table backstop in hand, while on the other hand every government minister asked tells us that No Deal will be no problem for the UK and we'll sail on untroubled after October 31st.
No one will say, not even in the rarefied cloisters of PB, not even such luminaries of leave as @MarqueeMark, @Luckyguy1983, or any other of the Leave inclined intellectual titans, which of these is actually the case.
It doesn't require much intellectual effort to work out that the only EU27 country that will suffer will be Ireland, and that the other 26 (plus the US) will ensure there is much aid to help its 5m people.
I'm just mystified as to why this rather obvious line of questioning is never used against those who argue No Deal is some sort of credible threat.
Just a little reminder of the NYT map of No Deal Brexit impact:
So - to answer my own question - and one which noone seems to ask any No Dealer on any interview I've ever heard - No Deal is far worse for us than for anyone else.
So how is threatening No Deal some sort of marvelous negotiating ploy for Britain?
It is, like everything else from Brexiters, a fail. Threatening No Deal will on the one hand frighten the EU so much that they will come begging to the negotiating table backstop in hand, while on the other hand every government minister asked tells us that No Deal will be no problem for the UK and we'll sail on untroubled after October 31st.
No one will say, not even in the rarefied cloisters of PB, not even such luminaries of leave as @MarqueeMark, @Luckyguy1983, or any other of the Leave inclined intellectual titans, which of these is actually the case.
It doesn't require much intellectual effort to work out that the only EU27 country that will suffer will be Ireland, and that the other 26 (plus the US) will ensure there is much aid to help its 5m people.
I'm just mystified as to why this rather obvious line of questioning is never used against those who argue No Deal is some sort of credible threat.
What about the Bavarian car worker? I thought they were going to suffer so much we would get "The easiest and best deal ever"
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
It has been ridiculous for a very long time. But then we knew all along that there are significant numbers of people who will do anything to prevent Brexit such is their disdain for democracy.
Er... M'lud, this Parliamentary session is virtually the longest on record and we want to present our exciting new legislation for the NHS and police to the Commons and to the British People in a Queens Speech in the same way thats happened hundreds and hundreds of times during the glorious reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
Honestly these people are just wasting everyone's time (and their own money) with this bullshit.
And then when the Defense Secretary is filmed saying something different BoZo is in contempt of court
Er... M'lud, this Parliamentary session is virtually the longest on record and we want to present our exciting new legislation for the NHS and police to the Commons and to the British People in a Queens Speech in the same way thats happened hundreds and hundreds of times during the glorious reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
Honestly these people are just wasting everyone's time (and their own money) with this bullshit.
That explains why Boris is proroguing Parliament. It doesn't explain more than 2 days of it say between October 10th to October 14th.
So how does Boris explain the days before then when it is common for Parliament to be in recess, able to be recalled were it necessary.
Mr. Royale, almost all the Lone Wolf books can be played for free on Project Aon (Joe Dever gave his permission, so it's all legal). Some of the newest ones, written in full/part by his son, aren't up, understandably.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
It has been ridiculous for a very long time. But then we knew all along that there are significant numbers of people who will do anything to prevent Brexit such is their disdain for democracy.
Democracy involves an independent judiciary and the rule of law.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
There is an argument which has also been made on pb that BBC Scotland's output is not Scottish enough. You mention Dr Who, which is made in Wales but has no distinctly Welsh content. For some nationalists, it is a matter of more Taggart and Rebus, not access to Inspector Morse. The reality, as you imply, is not much will change.
Pretty sure for most 'nationalists' the problem with the BBC is that it's a bit shite, not that it's not Scottish enough. It would just be better if licence money paid here could be used to make more content here, whatever its flavour (Taggart & Rebus were both STV productions as it happens).
I think Ireland pay c.£20m p.a. for BBC content? Perfect solution for an Indy Scotland, once the rUK gets over its massive huff.
Anyway, I'm glad I provoked some nostalgia for those decision tree books. I had a shrewd suspicion that the pb audience would be able to relate to them.
Anyway, I'm glad I provoked some nostalgia for those decision tree books. I had a shrewd suspicion that the pb audience would be able to relate to them.
The deadline is in our laws - so I fail to see what this 'withdrawal' would do to change that.
The Withdrawal method is not something anyone should rely on...
I guess you change the process from "UK PM has to show up at a scheduled meeting, if parliament wants to bind him it will have to try to write a watertight law and hope he doesn't think of a way to play silly buggers at the last minute" to "UK PM can back down at any time, alternatively UK Parliament can extend at any time by passing a law".
Anyway, I'm glad I provoked some nostalgia for those decision tree books. I had a shrewd suspicion that the pb audience would be able to relate to them.
I hope you always played them fair and square....no fingers marking old papers and fudging dice rolls.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
It has been ridiculous for a very long time. But then we knew all along that there are significant numbers of people who will do anything to prevent Brexit such is their disdain for democracy.
Democracy involves an independent judiciary and the rule of law.
I have not said they should not do what they want and waste their own money and time. Just that they look bloody stupid doing it
The line "They sought to overrule the Queen, the Queen !" is a magnificent one for the Tories to use in a GE campaign.
It feels like that is exactly what Team Cummings wants. They have brought this to a head and aren't too unhappy if the "liberal elite" ** step in and stop it. As they will go for a GE, screaming blue murder about this.
Anyway, I'm glad I provoked some nostalgia for those decision tree books. I had a shrewd suspicion that the pb audience would be able to relate to them.
I hope you always played them fair and square....no fingers marking old papers and fudging dice rolls.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
I suspect it might be workable provided you can separate out business from consumer.
"Tories are 3.6% of Shetland voters, so hard to lose high percentages!"
There's one thing all four by-elections on Thursday share. Labour lost share in all - and in England, it lost two more local seats by losing voter share compared to its result just three months ago, when you'd have thought it would be nigh impossible to fall any further.
Opinion polls seem to agree that Labour's voting intention has improved since Corbyn became a focus of Remain/Soft Brexit planning. But in Shetland (safe LD), East Kilbride (safe SNP), Radcliffe West (once safe Labour) and Witney North (once safe Tory, but the seat up for grabs had been a Labour gain in May), voters in real elections just twisted the knife into Labour a bit more.
It feels like that is exactly what Team Cummings wants. They have brought this to a head and aren't too unhappy if the "liberal elite" ** step in and stop it. As they will go for a GE, screaming blue murder about this.
A) They have to agree it amongst themselves first. Macron on board?
B ) They would still have to come up with an end date. And it is still making a mockery of the Article 50 procedure.
C) How does this declaration fit in with the Article 50 legal procedures set out by the Treaty anyway? (I suspect it doesn't. Legal challenge anyone?)
D) the UK would still have to change the end date from the 31st October currently fixed by SI. This does not look like a Govt. playing ball.
E) we have already revoked the 1972 legislation - meaning we are in breach of the EU treaties.....
I'd probably want a shitload of corroboration before picking over in minute detail a kite flown by Broony .
Brown is probably haunted by the knowledge that his decisions on Europe while in office have indirectly led to the likely break up of the UK due to Brexit.
That would be hilarious if true and would bugger up Boris's cunning plans utterly. What would he do? Beg them to retain it?
Surely the "deadline" is more or less self-imposed anyway? In the absence of a Macron veto, I suspect there was already a fairly open door to any requested extension. And BJ can still leave unilaterally on that day even if they do make such a move - indeed that's the current state of UK law since they passed the SI with an exit date the other week.
All they're doing in those circumstances is pre-answering an extension request. Really, it's just a way of making BJ own it rather than moaning about Johnny Foreigner being intransigent.
A) They have to agree it amongst themselves first. Macron on board?
B ) They would still have to come up with an end date. And it is still making a mockery of the Article 50 procedure.
C) How does this declaration fit in with the Article 50 legal procedures set out by the Treaty anyway? (I suspect it doesn't. Legal challenge anyone?)
D) the UK would still have to change the end date from the 31st October currently fixed by SI. This does not look like a Govt. playing ball.
E) we have already revoked the 1972 legislation - meaning we are in breach of the EU treaties.....
I'd probably want a shitload of corroboration before picking over in minute detail a kite flown by Broony .
Brown is probably haunted by the knowledge that his decisions on Europe while in office have indirectly led to the likely break up of the UK due to Brexit.
Is he bollocks. He is like Trump, a "never wrong"-er. He will just see it as other people being stupid.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
Anyway, I'm glad I provoked some nostalgia for those decision tree books. I had a shrewd suspicion that the pb audience would be able to relate to them.
I loved choose your own adventure books though I do have to wonder just exactly which books you were reading as mine didn't contain any buxom seductresses.
Mr. Royale, almost all the Lone Wolf books can be played for free on Project Aon (Joe Dever gave his permission, so it's all legal). Some of the newest ones, written in full/part by his son, aren't up, understandably.
The line "They sought to overrule the Queen, the Queen !" is a magnificent one for the Tories to use in a GE campaign.
It feels like that is exactly what Team Cummings wants. They have brought this to a head and aren't too unhappy if the "liberal elite" ** step in and stop it. As they will go for a GE, screaming blue murder about this.
** how it will be spun.
In terms of probable electoral success its looking to me like
Nick Timothy & Fiona Hill = Garrrrry Lyon & Tim Paine Dominic Cummings = Ben Stokes
"Tories are 3.6% of Shetland voters, so hard to lose high percentages!"
There's one thing all four by-elections on Thursday share. Labour lost share in all - and in England, it lost two more local seats by losing voter share compared to its result just three months ago, when you'd have thought it would be nigh impossible to fall any further.
Opinion polls seem to agree that Labour's voting intention has improved since Corbyn became a focus of Remain/Soft Brexit planning. But in Shetland (safe LD), East Kilbride (safe SNP), Radcliffe West (once safe Labour) and Witney North (once safe Tory, but the seat up for grabs had been a Labour gain in May), voters in real elections just twisted the knife into Labour a bit more.
Labour lose share when they're winning, lose share when they're on 5%, 50%, second, third, fourth, sixth.
If there was ever a seat where one woman and her dog voted for Labour last time the dog would have stayed home whilst the lady was washing her hair.
That the Monarchy may take a hit from people either confused about how our system works and who for some reason want to replace the monarch becasue she doesn't have power over the PM in any genuine way and they want the monarch to have that power, is one thing. But the tumescent joy of some that they might be able to give the republican cause a shot in the arm off the back of this situation is both blatant and overdone. The sheer unbridled glee at being able to take advantage of an at best tangentially related situation for an otherwise minorly supported cause, the beloved tactic of extremist revolutionaries everywhere. Let's use anger at this one thing in order to rile up against this other thing!
And I agree with you even though I am a republican
It is not the Queens fault
Its not but this was bound to happen the moment Boris got her involved.
Nice one Boris.
As I said yesterday, she made a serious mistake yesterday morning.
The Queen has one job. She flunked it.
The Queen has one job and she did it.
She's no more than a glorified functionary. A figurehead puppet of the Prime Minister of the day.
As she should be in a democratic constitutional monarchy.
If she wants to start getting involved in decision making she should abdicate and stand for Parliament.
That’s overstating it - it’s true in the field of active politics, but she counsels behind the scenes. And outside politics she had a major albeit symbolic role
Nothing to prevent functionary figureheads providing counsel behind the scenes, anyone can give counsel, what she can't give is instructions. Her counsel can be ignored by an elected politician who wants to do the opposite and quite right too.
As for symbolic role, I'm not sure how a symbolic role differs from saying she is a figurehead puppet? Surely symbolism is part of being a figurehead?
Kids of today are missing out by not doing the choose your own adventure books. Fortnite, you can stick it up your arse. What you need is to spend your whole family holiday, continuously dying and having to go back to page 1 in a choose your own adventure, to see the real value in life!
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
I doubt you have ever moved moved tooling across borders. It happens all the time. The issue will be capacity in UK factories.
I worked on moving manufactured parts around the single market because there are no borders.
Erecting barriers between where the parts are manufactured, and where they are assembled, will not encourage the manufacturers to move to service fewer assembly lines
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
If Boris's reasons for proroguing Parliament are really sincere then he should have no problem in providing such a statement. If he isn't then one can only conclude he is lying.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
*maybe
The irony is that I think it's a crap idea for the Tees Valley but as a solution for Northern Ireland it works far better than anything else we could come up with.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
If Boris's reasons for proroguing Parliament are really sincere then he should have no problem in providing such a statement. If he isn't then one can only conclude he is lying.
To judge the sincerity he will have to say wait to hear the Queens Speech, as I am unable to divulge the content of HMQ speech in advance. Oops too late now!
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
If Boris's reasons for proroguing Parliament are really sincere then he should have no problem in providing such a statement. If he isn't then one can only conclude he is lying.
The line "They sought to overrule the Queen, the Queen !" is a magnificent one for the Tories to use in a GE campaign.
It feels like that is exactly what Team Cummings wants. They have brought this to a head and aren't too unhappy if the "liberal elite" ** step in and stop it. As they will go for a GE, screaming blue murder about this.
** how it will be spun.
In terms of probable electoral success its looking to me like
Nick Timothy & Fiona Hill = Garrrrry Lyon & Tim Paine Dominic Cummings = Ben Stokes
"Tories are 3.6% of Shetland voters, so hard to lose high percentages!"
There's one thing all four by-elections on Thursday share. Labour lost share in all - and in England, it lost two more local seats by losing voter share compared to its result just three months ago, when you'd have thought it would be nigh impossible to fall any further.
Opinion polls seem to agree that Labour's voting intention has improved since Corbyn became a focus of Remain/Soft Brexit planning. But in Shetland (safe LD), East Kilbride (safe SNP), Radcliffe West (once safe Labour) and Witney North (once safe Tory, but the seat up for grabs had been a Labour gain in May), voters in real elections just twisted the knife into Labour a bit more.
Labour lose share when they're winning, lose share when they're on 5%, 50%, second, third, fourth, sixth.
If there was ever a seat where one woman and her dog voted for Labour last time the dog would have stayed home whilst the lady was washing her hair.
Off topic Why do the Aussies call Nathan Lyon Gary?
I doubt you have ever moved moved tooling across borders. It happens all the time. The issue will be capacity in UK factories.
I worked on moving manufactured parts around the single market because there are no borders.
Erecting barriers between where the parts are manufactured, and where they are assembled, will not encourage the manufacturers to move to service fewer assembly lines
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
If the court decides that the prorogation is reviewable, the government's motives will be at the heart of the decision whether to set it aside. The Prime Minister, as guiding light in this process, needs to explain himself.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
If Boris's reasons for proroguing Parliament are really sincere then he should have no problem in providing such a statement. If he isn't then one can only conclude he is lying.
I doubt he would have a problem... But the court won't ask him to as they'll conclude what he's done is perfectly legal and consistuational and within the powers of the Prime Minister.
Have to say this is all feeling a lot like the "legal action" over the bus that everyone got very excited about a few weeks ago...
Of course, as with the £350m claim, whether it's morally or politically correct is matter for debate and discussion but it clearly is not illegal.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
*maybe
'Teeside (forever a part of the UK)'
No chance of a rebirth for the Kingdom of Northumbria then?
Conscious, or not conscious? Trump is a Kremlin asset, if not in the accepted espionage usage of the word, but definitely in the literal sense, since his presence in the White House benefits the objectives of Putin, in the same way that Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings are Useful Idiots for Mr Putin.
I wonder what excuses the Brexit supporting Useful Idiots on PB will come up with for the betrayal of their country to the foreign policy objectives of Vladimir Putin? Who are the traitors and saboteurs now?
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
If Boris's reasons for proroguing Parliament are really sincere then he should have no problem in providing such a statement. If he isn't then one can only conclude he is lying.
I doubt he would have a problem... But the court won't ask him to as they'll conclude what he's done is perfectly legal and consistuational and within the powers of the Prime Minister.
Have to say this is all feeling a lot like the "legal action" over the bus that everyone got very excited about a few weeks ago...
Of course, as with the £350m claim, whether it's morally or politically correct is matter for debate and discussion but it clearly is not illegal.
It's a really interesting case, actually. Is the royal prerogative relating to the prorogation of Parliament reviewable at all? If it is, how does the court approach that review process?
If there has been one minor plus about Brexit, it's that lawyers have had some really interesting cases to chew over.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
*maybe
The DUP are in a bind and need to get out too
Yep it is quite elegant although I don't know the mechanisms in detail (sounds like @eek does and was able to provide some insight)
But the EU will surely barely notice No deal because of their better preparations (said a PB expert).
So perhaps you can answer the question as to whether our hardball no deal approach will bring the EU grovelling to its knees on account of the sheer destruction and chaos it will bring upon them, or whether no deal is no problem at all and we will breeze right on without really noticing it save for a temporary shortage of avocados from Ocado.
What I have said (as you yourself have agreed in your more lucid moments) is that in Britain's case, the big ticket scare stories in the immediate term won't happen. In the longer term there will no doubt be other challenges, which can be dealt with case by case. Where the solution is financial, the UK will enjoy the *ongoing* benefit of no longer contributing to the EU budget.
In terms of the EU, I would imagine their most pressing concern is £30bn to find. Disruption to member states is another issue, and whilst we're constantly reminded that a smaller proportion of the EU's exports go to the UK than vice versa, it should be remembered that the effect won't fall proportionately. For every largely unaffected Luxembourg there is a significantly affected Republic of Ireland.
Interesting comment on Sky that will John Major be questioned why he prorogued the HOC over cash for questions.
This whole thing is spinning wildly out of control
Well it can hardly be argued that proroguing was advantageous for Major given the outcome of the 1997 GE.
Well the political ramifications are a seperate issue. Boris may pay the price politically for proroguing Parliament (or he may not) - that will be up to the voters to decide in a general election.
The question for now is whether it's legal or not. It looks to me that the governments legal case is watertight,
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
What do you think is ludicrous about this?
Lawyers thinking they're the living embodiment of Attiticus Finch, Perry Mason and Ally McBeal all rolled into one and just making legal bullshit up for their own politics.
If the court decides that the prorogation is reviewable, the government's motives will be at the heart of the decision whether to set it aside. The Prime Minister, as guiding light in this process, needs to explain himself.
I cannot see Boris doing anything other than instructing his QC to act on his behalf
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
*maybe
'Teeside (forever a part of the UK)'
No chance of a rebirth for the Kingdom of Northumbria then?
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
It has been ridiculous for a very long time. But then we knew all along that there are significant numbers of people who will do anything to prevent Brexit such is their disdain for democracy.
Democracy involves an independent judiciary and the rule of law.
I have not said they should not do what they want and waste their own money and time. Just that they look bloody stupid doing it
Lawyers will take the instrucitons their clients want to give them. If their clients want to look stupid, so be it. That's democracy!
And he was rightly heavily criticised for it at the time.
In sharp contrast to today, the circumstances at the time required no extraordinary remedy, as he was kicked out of office in the general election which followed shortly thereafter.
Interesting idea but presumably still bumps up against the DUP.
if it gives NI some trading advantages all parties will probably say yes.
Its actually astounding that the local MLAs havent the brains to turn the current impasse to their advantage.But theyd rather sit in the trenhes and shoot at eachother.
As the article says, it would be a different customs and tariff environment from the UK and hence would I'm sure fall foul of a DUP red line but if they call it a freeport and this allows the DUP to accept it without losing face then I'm all for it.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Is it actually a workable plan or just another unicorn?
Not sure - it is the backstop by another name but if they can point to several mainland areas which are treated in the same way then perhaps yes it could work.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
But the internal export mechanism would also have to include local consumer purchases where appropriate so it's not that unicorny - I suspect the approach required already exists in the methods used to remove the risk of carousal export fraud on high value electronic goods such as CPUs and mobile phones.
Ah in which case then yes it becomes workable. The biggest barrier would be convincing the DUP that if it's ok for Teeside (forever a part of the UK) then it's OK for NI (forever* a part of the UK). Which isn't a huge stretch or shouldn't be for a sensible person. But then it's the DUP we are talking about...
*maybe
'Teeside (forever a part of the UK)'
No chance of a rebirth for the Kingdom of Northumbria then?
If you get the votes...
What about the parts formerly in North Yorkshire (where Teesport is)
The media are now reporting John Major will have his own questions to answer and are going into detail on the cash for question scandal and his decision to prorogue
But the EU will surely barely notice No deal because of their better preparations (said a PB expert).
So perhaps you can answer the question as to whether our hardball no deal approach will bring the EU grovelling to its knees on account of the sheer destruction and chaos it will bring upon them, or whether no deal is no problem at all and we will breeze right on without really noticing it save for a temporary shortage of avocados from Ocado.
What I have said (as you yourself have agreed in your more lucid moments) is that in Britain's case, the big ticket scare stories in the immediate term won't happen. In the longer term there will no doubt be other challenges, which can be dealt with case by case. Where the solution is financial, the UK will enjoy the *ongoing* benefit of no longer contributing to the EU budget.
In terms of the EU, I would imagine their most pressing concern is £30bn to find. Disruption to member states is another issue, and whilst we're constantly reminded that a smaller proportion of the EU's exports go to the UK than vice versa, it should be remembered that the effect won't fall proportionately. For every largely unaffected Luxembourg there is a significantly affected Republic of Ireland.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
It has been ridiculous for a very long time. But then we knew all along that there are significant numbers of people who will do anything to prevent Brexit such is their disdain for democracy.
Democracy involves an independent judiciary and the rule of law.
I have not said they should not do what they want and waste their own money and time. Just that they look bloody stupid doing it
You also suggested they were showing a disdain for democracy, which given the issue at hand is... curious.
The media are now reporting John Major will have his own questions to answer and are going into detail on the cash for question scandal and his decision to prorogue
But the EU will surely barely notice No deal because of their better preparations (said a PB expert).
So perhaps you can answer the question as to whether our hardball no deal approach will bring the EU grovelling to its knees on account of the sheer destruction and chaos it will bring upon them, or whether no deal is no problem at all and we will breeze right on without really noticing it save for a temporary shortage of avocados from Ocado.
What I have said (as you yourself have agreed in your more lucid moments) is that in Britain's case, the big ticket scare stories in the immediate term won't happen. In the longer term there will no doubt be other challenges, which can be dealt with case by case. Where the solution is financial, the UK will enjoy the *ongoing* benefit of no longer contributing to the EU budget.
In terms of the EU, I would imagine their most pressing concern is £30bn to find. Disruption to member states is another issue, and whilst we're constantly reminded that a smaller proportion of the EU's exports go to the UK than vice versa, it should be remembered that the effect won't fall proportionately. For every largely unaffected Luxembourg there is a significantly affected Republic of Ireland.
I believe the UK's net contribution represents c5% of the total EU budget. A problem, maybe, but hardly insurmountable. Ireland won't be allowed to fail; it will be supported by the other 26 and the US who value the benefits of the single market more than any concession to the UK. A UK which is in any case, going to suffer far more as a result of No Deal than any EU state.
In the short to medium term it's not the big ticket scare stories (though no doubt there will be some that prove true) but the myriad things due to the law of unintended consequences.
Interesting comment on Sky that will John Major be questioned why he prorogued the HOC over cash for questions.
This whole thing is spinning wildly out of control
Well it can hardly be argued that proroguing was advantageous for Major given the outcome of the 1997 GE.
Well the political ramifications are a seperate issue. Boris may pay the price politically for proroguing Parliament (or he may not) - that will be up to the voters to decide in a general election.
The question for now is whether it's legal or not. It looks to me that the governments legal case is watertight,
A fool could have told them that and saved the gazillions in lawyers fees
Comments
But seriously I do want the mps to succeed in stopping no deal
One of my biggest shocks in my whole life of being politically aware was just how few MPs seemed to have actually done this.
Don't forget we have agreed that May was the crap salesman and Boris the supersalesman.
Erecting barriers between where the parts are manufactured, and where they are assembled, will not encourage the manufacturers to move to service fewer assembly lines
https://twitter.com/severincarrell/status/1167366256221130752
I dont remember agreeing that!
May was out of her depth and BoJo is a devious scumbag is more my recollectioin.
I think Ireland pay c.£20m p.a. for BBC content? Perfect solution for an Indy Scotland, once the rUK gets over its massive huff.
Lawyers who really should know better are taking leave of their senses as well as their training.
The Withdrawal method is not something anyone should rely on...
Honestly these people are just wasting everyone's time (and their own money) with this bullshit.
I'm just mystified as to why this rather obvious line of questioning is never used against those who argue No Deal is some sort of credible threat.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1167367575543721984
So how does Boris explain the days before then when it is common for Parliament to be in recess, able to be recalled were it necessary.
B ) They would still have to come up with an end date. And it is still making a mockery of the Article 50 procedure.
C) How does this declaration fit in with the Article 50 legal procedures set out by the Treaty anyway? (I suspect it doesn't. Legal challenge anyone?)
D) the UK would still have to change the end date from the 31st October currently fixed by SI. This does not look like a Govt. playing ball.
E) we have already revoked the 1972 legislation - meaning we are in breach of the EU treaties.....
I really enjoyed them a lot as well.
Not been blogging much at all lately, but last month reviewed the first book after replaying it: http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.com/2019/07/review-flight-from-dark-lone-wolf-book.html
Seems an odd word for it
This whole thing is spinning wildly out of control
Lawyer: "Sir John, why did you prorogue Parliement?"
JM: "To avoid scrutiny, just like BoZo is doing now"
I have not said they should not do what they want and waste their own money and time. Just that they look bloody stupid doing it
So Twickenham would be a heck of a stretch target - you'd imagine it would only fall when all the above went blue.
** how it will be spun.
There's one thing all four by-elections on Thursday share. Labour lost share in all - and in England, it lost two more local seats by losing voter share compared to its result just three months ago, when you'd have thought it would be nigh impossible to fall any further.
Opinion polls seem to agree that Labour's voting intention has improved since Corbyn became a focus of Remain/Soft Brexit planning. But in Shetland (safe LD), East Kilbride (safe SNP), Radcliffe West (once safe Labour) and Witney North (once safe Tory, but the seat up for grabs had been a Labour gain in May), voters in real elections just twisted the knife into Labour a bit more.
All they're doing in those circumstances is pre-answering an extension request. Really, it's just a way of making BJ own it rather than moaning about Johnny Foreigner being intransigent.
I mean this is a classic developing economy move. The Peoples' Republic of China instituted Special Economic Zones (and very successfully too) in the 90s to encourage enterprise and investment as they began to open to the West. No idea how many other countries have them (Delaware I suppose is an obvious example).
It's the "internal export" mechanism which might prove quite unicorny.
Nick Timothy & Fiona Hill = Garrrrry Lyon & Tim Paine
Dominic Cummings = Ben Stokes Labour lose share when they're winning, lose share when they're on 5%, 50%, second, third, fourth, sixth.
If there was ever a seat where one woman and her dog voted for Labour last time the dog would have stayed home whilst the lady was washing her hair.
As for symbolic role, I'm not sure how a symbolic role differs from saying she is a figurehead puppet? Surely symbolism is part of being a figurehead?
*maybe
Although I have done that across Europe for others industries. Parts bought in the UK and installed in Belgium. Sadly won't be doing that any more.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1997/mar/19/conservatives.uk
Have to say this is all feeling a lot like the "legal action" over the bus that everyone got very excited about a few weeks ago...
Of course, as with the £350m claim, whether it's morally or politically correct is matter for debate and discussion but it clearly is not illegal.
No chance of a rebirth for the Kingdom of Northumbria then?
I wonder what excuses the Brexit supporting Useful Idiots on PB will come up with for the betrayal of their country to the foreign policy objectives of Vladimir Putin? Who are the traitors and saboteurs now?
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/news-trump/us-spies-say-trumps-g7-performance-is-a-new-low-that-suggests-hes-a-russian-asset-being-manipulated-by-putin/ar-AAGxNTQ?ocid=spartanntp
If there has been one minor plus about Brexit, it's that lawyers have had some really interesting cases to chew over.
In terms of the EU, I would imagine their most pressing concern is £30bn to find. Disruption to member states is another issue, and whilst we're constantly reminded that a smaller proportion of the EU's exports go to the UK than vice versa, it should be remembered that the effect won't fall proportionately. For every largely unaffected Luxembourg there is a significantly affected Republic of Ireland.
The question for now is whether it's legal or not. It looks to me that the governments legal case is watertight,
In sharp contrast to today, the circumstances at the time required no extraordinary remedy, as he was kicked out of office in the general election which followed shortly thereafter.
The media are now reporting John Major will have his own questions to answer and are going into detail on the cash for question scandal and his decision to prorogue
In the short to medium term it's not the big ticket scare stories (though no doubt there will be some that prove true) but the myriad things due to the law of unintended consequences.