I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
It's pretty silly, indeed raving bonkers, to blame the one person who campaigned vigorously for Remain for Brexit. And also pretty silly to blame those who voted for Theresa May: Brexit had already been decided by then, and if she had had the majority she asked for and needed, she'd have been able to deliver it in the sensible way she was planning, without Labour and other opposition parties helping (and actively voting with) the ERG to torpedo it.
I'll grant you the other two categories.
Cameron richly deserves his share of the blame/kudos for Brexit, given that he was the one who called the referendum and set out its terms in the first place. May campaigned for PM on a mandate of implementing Brexit, and it was she who invoked Article 50 with no proper plan in place. So she also shares in the honours.
Cameron was right to call the referendum, which he didn't exactly hurry into. Not that he had any choice - but are you seriously suggesting that the voice of the majority should not have been heard, just because you don't like the answer?
Theresa May stonewalled Article 50 for over nine months, which was hardly rushing into it, with a two-year extendable implementation period. Those who voted Leave would have had a very, very legitimate grievance if she'd waited even longer. What's more, it was impossible to have a 'proper plan' in place, not least because the EU, to their great discredit and contrary to their own interests, had the brain-dead idea of insisting that we couldn't negotiate the final destination until after we'd agreed to a transition to somewhere unknown and actually left.
At the time Cameron named the date of the referendum, you were predicting Remain would win by 70-30. You shared his delusions about his strategy.
I thought Remain would win 58:42 at the start.
I was wrong too.
They lost because people like you changed their minds, which, despite Richard Nabavi's insistence that Cameron was practically perfect in every way, was mainly down to Cameron's failed strategy.
The government has shelved plans to open rapid-turnaround coronavirus test centres across England over Christmas amid concerns from public health experts about the accuracy of their results, the Guardian has learned.
Ministers had planned to convert a number of existing testing sites into centres for lateral flow tests, which provide results in 30 minutes, to help cope with an anticipated surge in demand.
However, the scheme was halted last week after concerns were raised by directors of public health about the accuracy of the tests and the potential false reassurance given to people who test negative. A government source said the planned rollout “proved unnecessary”.
Let’s get right into the fluff of the swab on this one.
The rapid tests can be as low as 50% accurate? The upper end on these is what?
Is a 50% accurate test better or worse than no test?
Has anyone had one?
Worse, if it gives false negatives, because it means people who might have been isolating due to symptoms don’t.
This is a fairly damning article on why using it in schools (for example) is not a smart idea for that reason.
What about used in combination for stronger guidance. Is it/Could it be combined with questionnaire whilst you are waiting?
I mean if testresult said no, but you answered yes to feeling worse than you ever have, lost all smell and taste, and spent all night on pot whilst projectile vomiting into sink, they would be mad to send you away with all clear wouldn’t’ they?
No, because many people including many superspreaders have quite mild symptoms.
Is that the reason the test accuracy is so low, it struggles to pick those up?
It is of interest that while this has been going on, in the past week, testing capacity for PCR tests has been increased by 150K
And that is a move to better reliability? If so that is a good thing.
The PCR tests are the ones with the highest reliability, but require a lab too process.
The lateral flow tests are the 15 minute test that can be done anywhere. But have reliability concerns.
t should be noted that false negatives have been an issue with all tests for COVID - apart from some very complex and impractical to scale lab tests. Which were used by Porton Down for creating reference data IIRC.
The biggest problem with the PCR tests is that they are so sensitive that they will pick up small RNA fragments, which are non-infectious, as positives. So for PCR tests, at least, it is the false positives, rather than false negatives, that are the issue. But for the purposes of infection control and occupational health surveillance programmes, that is the way round you'd prefer.
The government has shelved plans to open rapid-turnaround coronavirus test centres across England over Christmas amid concerns from public health experts about the accuracy of their results, the Guardian has learned.
Ministers had planned to convert a number of existing testing sites into centres for lateral flow tests, which provide results in 30 minutes, to help cope with an anticipated surge in demand.
However, the scheme was halted last week after concerns were raised by directors of public health about the accuracy of the tests and the potential false reassurance given to people who test negative. A government source said the planned rollout “proved unnecessary”.
Let’s get right into the fluff of the swab on this one.
The rapid tests can be as low as 50% accurate? The upper end on these is what?
Is a 50% accurate test better or worse than no test?
Has anyone had one?
Worse, if it gives false negatives, because it means people who might have been isolating due to symptoms don’t.
This is a fairly damning article on why using it in schools (for example) is not a smart idea for that reason.
What about used in combination for stronger guidance. Is it/Could it be combined with questionnaire whilst you are waiting?
I mean if testresult said no, but you answered yes to feeling worse than you ever have, lost all smell and taste, and spent all night on pot whilst projectile vomiting into sink, they would be mad to send you away with all clear wouldn’t’ they?
No, because many people including many superspreaders have quite mild symptoms.
Is that the reason the test accuracy is so low, it struggles to pick those up?
No idea, ask a medic.
I’m not a doctor but I’m happy to take a look.
My hypothesis is, a test looking for antibodies will have a harder hunt in someone displaying no symptoms, but easier one in someone with nose oozing, coughing wheezing, phlegm dripping from their ears.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
The government has shelved plans to open rapid-turnaround coronavirus test centres across England over Christmas amid concerns from public health experts about the accuracy of their results, the Guardian has learned.
Ministers had planned to convert a number of existing testing sites into centres for lateral flow tests, which provide results in 30 minutes, to help cope with an anticipated surge in demand.
However, the scheme was halted last week after concerns were raised by directors of public health about the accuracy of the tests and the potential false reassurance given to people who test negative. A government source said the planned rollout “proved unnecessary”.
Let’s get right into the fluff of the swab on this one.
The rapid tests can be as low as 50% accurate? The upper end on these is what?
Is a 50% accurate test better or worse than no test?
Has anyone had one?
Worse, if it gives false negatives, because it means people who might have been isolating due to symptoms don’t.
This is a fairly damning article on why using it in schools (for example) is not a smart idea for that reason.
What about used in combination for stronger guidance. Is it/Could it be combined with questionnaire whilst you are waiting?
I mean if testresult said no, but you answered yes to feeling worse than you ever have, lost all smell and taste, and spent all night on pot whilst projectile vomiting into sink, they would be mad to send you away with all clear wouldn’t’ they?
No, because many people including many superspreaders have quite mild symptoms.
Is that the reason the test accuracy is so low, it struggles to pick those up?
Given the last time a teacher was made SoS for Education in this country it was an even worse shambles than usual, I’ll suspend judgement on that.
Also been a school principal, district administrator and assistant superintendent, as well as adjunct professor before being named Connecticut’s state chief last year, so I think probably a little better than Estelle.
The government has shelved plans to open rapid-turnaround coronavirus test centres across England over Christmas amid concerns from public health experts about the accuracy of their results, the Guardian has learned.
Ministers had planned to convert a number of existing testing sites into centres for lateral flow tests, which provide results in 30 minutes, to help cope with an anticipated surge in demand.
However, the scheme was halted last week after concerns were raised by directors of public health about the accuracy of the tests and the potential false reassurance given to people who test negative. A government source said the planned rollout “proved unnecessary”.
Let’s get right into the fluff of the swab on this one.
The rapid tests can be as low as 50% accurate? The upper end on these is what?
Is a 50% accurate test better or worse than no test?
Has anyone had one?
Worse, if it gives false negatives, because it means people who might have been isolating due to symptoms don’t.
This is a fairly damning article on why using it in schools (for example) is not a smart idea for that reason.
What about used in combination for stronger guidance. Is it/Could it be combined with questionnaire whilst you are waiting?
I mean if testresult said no, but you answered yes to feeling worse than you ever have, lost all smell and taste, and spent all night on pot whilst projectile vomiting into sink, they would be mad to send you away with all clear wouldn’t’ they?
No, because many people including many superspreaders have quite mild symptoms.
Is that the reason the test accuracy is so low, it struggles to pick those up?
It is of interest that while this has been going on, in the past week, testing capacity for PCR tests has been increased by 150K
And that is a move to better reliability? If so that is a good thing.
The PCR tests are the ones with the highest reliability, but require a lab too process.
The lateral flow tests are the 15 minute test that can be done anywhere. But have reliability concerns.
t should be noted that false negatives have been an issue with all tests for COVID - apart from some very complex and impractical to scale lab tests. Which were used by Porton Down for creating reference data IIRC.
The biggest problem with the PCR tests is that they are so sensitive that they will pick up small RNA fragments, which are non-infectious, as positives. So for PCR tests, at least, it is the false positives, rather than false negatives, that are the issue. But for the purposes of infection control and occupational health surveillance programmes, that is the way round you'd prefer.
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
Unless of course you're still labouring under the delusion that Brexit can be blocked.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
We voted to leave the customs union and have our own trade deals too. We would have been trapped in it.
Not only would we have been trapped in it, we would have become the only country in the planet in the customs union that we had already voted to leave who lacked a unilateral exit. Of the 29 nations in the customs union there would have been the EU27 with Article 50, Turkey who could give notice to leave whenever they chose and us as the sole members with no unilateral exit mechanism.
If the deal was so fantastic why deny the UK a unilateral exit? Why deny us a notification clause that even full EU members have?
The government has shelved plans to open rapid-turnaround coronavirus test centres across England over Christmas amid concerns from public health experts about the accuracy of their results, the Guardian has learned.
Ministers had planned to convert a number of existing testing sites into centres for lateral flow tests, which provide results in 30 minutes, to help cope with an anticipated surge in demand.
However, the scheme was halted last week after concerns were raised by directors of public health about the accuracy of the tests and the potential false reassurance given to people who test negative. A government source said the planned rollout “proved unnecessary”.
Let’s get right into the fluff of the swab on this one.
The rapid tests can be as low as 50% accurate? The upper end on these is what?
Is a 50% accurate test better or worse than no test?
Has anyone had one?
Worse, if it gives false negatives, because it means people who might have been isolating due to symptoms don’t.
This is a fairly damning article on why using it in schools (for example) is not a smart idea for that reason.
What about used in combination for stronger guidance. Is it/Could it be combined with questionnaire whilst you are waiting?
I mean if testresult said no, but you answered yes to feeling worse than you ever have, lost all smell and taste, and spent all night on pot whilst projectile vomiting into sink, they would be mad to send you away with all clear wouldn’t’ they?
No, because many people including many superspreaders have quite mild symptoms.
Is that the reason the test accuracy is so low, it struggles to pick those up?
No idea, ask a medic.
I’m not a doctor but I’m happy to take a look.
My hypothesis is, a test looking for antibodies will have a harder hunt in someone displaying no symptoms, but easier one in someone with nose oozing, coughing wheezing, phlegm dripping from their ears.
What do you think?
Antibody tests are effective in detecting antibodies. So will not detect those in the early stages of infection before the adaptive immune response has been launched. However, antibody tests will detect those who have had COVID and recovered.
Antigen and RNA tests (such at RT-PCR) will only detect those currently infected, not those infected and recovered. Antigen tests tend to be less sensitive and may only work well with those with high viral loads. PCR tests are extremely (overly) sensitive and are the gold standard for testing those currently infected.
The reason the sensitivity of the rapid test drops from lab use, to trained personnel use, to public use is down to poorer collection of the specimen by the less trained persons in less ideal circumstances.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
Hard to avoid the conclusion Macron isn't using the lorry blockage as extra leverage to get what he wants in the final Brexit deal.
He's holding out.
Absolutely. Manny is the hero of every remainer this evening, killing no deal more with every lorry.
If French Presidential communications were to be leaked and it were revealed that Macron had said about the new covid strain "Super, punissons les trous du cul anglais pour le Brexit", would we have a case for suing France for the costs of this freight blockage?
Isn't the idiom trous noirs anglais?
It's a disappointing French idiom if so! I just google translated this, but I do love many French idioms. "Avoir le cul bordé de nouilles" (To have an arse surrounded by noodles = to be very lucky). "L'esprit d'escalier" (The ghost of the staircase - when you think of the perfect riposte after the conversation is over so the ghost on the staircase has just told you it). And so many more..
It may be some consolation that I remember reading the possibly apocryphal story that French and Russian scientists were very upset when Anglophone scientists coined the term 'black hole', because the word for word translation means ...
What really upset them, though, was that when Stephen HAwking and colleagues came up witrh the idea that these bodies might be surrounded by a fuzz of certain particles, they called the result a 'hairy black hole'.
Wasn't there similar consternation about the French version of Mazda's MR2?
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
Hard to avoid the conclusion Macron isn't using the lorry blockage as extra leverage to get what he wants in the final Brexit deal.
He's holding out.
Absolutely. Manny is the hero of every remainer this evening, killing no deal more with every lorry.
If French Presidential communications were to be leaked and it were revealed that Macron had said about the new covid strain "Super, punissons les trous du cul anglais pour le Brexit", would we have a case for suing France for the costs of this freight blockage?
Isn't the idiom trous noirs anglais?
It's a disappointing French idiom if so! I just google translated this, but I do love many French idioms. "Avoir le cul bordé de nouilles" (To have an arse surrounded by noodles = to be very lucky). "L'esprit d'escalier" (The ghost of the staircase - when you think of the perfect riposte after the conversation is over so the ghost on the staircase has just told you it). And so many more..
It may be some consolation that I remember reading the possibly apocryphal story that French and Russian scientists were very upset when Anglophone scientists coined the term 'black hole', because the word for word translation means ...
What really upset them, though, was that when Stephen HAwking and colleagues came up witrh the idea that these bodies might be surrounded by a fuzz of certain particles, they called the result a 'hairy black hole'.
Wasn't there similar consternation about the French version of Mazda's MR2?
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
That sounds rather thrilling.
Yes in a Chinese curse sense. Thank goodness we avoided that disaster.
Hard to avoid the conclusion Macron isn't using the lorry blockage as extra leverage to get what he wants in the final Brexit deal.
He's holding out.
Absolutely. Manny is the hero of every remainer this evening, killing no deal more with every lorry.
If French Presidential communications were to be leaked and it were revealed that Macron had said about the new covid strain "Super, punissons les trous du cul anglais pour le Brexit", would we have a case for suing France for the costs of this freight blockage?
Isn't the idiom trous noirs anglais?
It's a disappointing French idiom if so! I just google translated this, but I do love many French idioms. "Avoir le cul bordé de nouilles" (To have an arse surrounded by noodles = to be very lucky). "L'esprit d'escalier" (The ghost of the staircase - when you think of the perfect riposte after the conversation is over so the ghost on the staircase has just told you it). And so many more..
It may be some consolation that I remember reading the possibly apocryphal story that French and Russian scientists were very upset when Anglophone scientists coined the term 'black hole', because the word for word translation means ...
What really upset them, though, was that when Stephen HAwking and colleagues came up witrh the idea that these bodies might be surrounded by a fuzz of certain particles, they called the result a 'hairy black hole'.
Wasn't there similar consternation about the French version of Mazda's MR2?
Hard to avoid the conclusion Macron isn't using the lorry blockage as extra leverage to get what he wants in the final Brexit deal.
He's holding out.
Absolutely. Manny is the hero of every remainer this evening, killing no deal more with every lorry.
If French Presidential communications were to be leaked and it were revealed that Macron had said about the new covid strain "Super, punissons les trous du cul anglais pour le Brexit", would we have a case for suing France for the costs of this freight blockage?
Isn't the idiom trous noirs anglais?
It's a disappointing French idiom if so! I just google translated this, but I do love many French idioms. "Avoir le cul bordé de nouilles" (To have an arse surrounded by noodles = to be very lucky). "L'esprit d'escalier" (The ghost of the staircase - when you think of the perfect riposte after the conversation is over so the ghost on the staircase has just told you it). And so many more..
It may be some consolation that I remember reading the possibly apocryphal story that French and Russian scientists were very upset when Anglophone scientists coined the term 'black hole', because the word for word translation means ...
What really upset them, though, was that when Stephen HAwking and colleagues came up witrh the idea that these bodies might be surrounded by a fuzz of certain particles, they called the result a 'hairy black hole'.
Wasn't there similar consternation about the French version of Mazda's MR2?
Hard to avoid the conclusion Macron isn't using the lorry blockage as extra leverage to get what he wants in the final Brexit deal.
He's holding out.
Absolutely. Manny is the hero of every remainer this evening, killing no deal more with every lorry.
If French Presidential communications were to be leaked and it were revealed that Macron had said about the new covid strain "Super, punissons les trous du cul anglais pour le Brexit", would we have a case for suing France for the costs of this freight blockage?
Isn't the idiom trous noirs anglais?
It's a disappointing French idiom if so! I just google translated this, but I do love many French idioms. "Avoir le cul bordé de nouilles" (To have an arse surrounded by noodles = to be very lucky). "L'esprit d'escalier" (The ghost of the staircase - when you think of the perfect riposte after the conversation is over so the ghost on the staircase has just told you it). And so many more..
It may be some consolation that I remember reading the possibly apocryphal story that French and Russian scientists were very upset when Anglophone scientists coined the term 'black hole', because the word for word translation means ...
What really upset them, though, was that when Stephen HAwking and colleagues came up witrh the idea that these bodies might be surrounded by a fuzz of certain particles, they called the result a 'hairy black hole'.
Wasn't there similar consternation about the French version of Mazda's MR2?
Hard to avoid the conclusion Macron isn't using the lorry blockage as extra leverage to get what he wants in the final Brexit deal.
He's holding out.
Absolutely. Manny is the hero of every remainer this evening, killing no deal more with every lorry.
If French Presidential communications were to be leaked and it were revealed that Macron had said about the new covid strain "Super, punissons les trous du cul anglais pour le Brexit", would we have a case for suing France for the costs of this freight blockage?
Isn't the idiom trous noirs anglais?
It's a disappointing French idiom if so! I just google translated this, but I do love many French idioms. "Avoir le cul bordé de nouilles" (To have an arse surrounded by noodles = to be very lucky). "L'esprit d'escalier" (The ghost of the staircase - when you think of the perfect riposte after the conversation is over so the ghost on the staircase has just told you it). And so many more..
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
The government has shelved plans to open rapid-turnaround coronavirus test centres across England over Christmas amid concerns from public health experts about the accuracy of their results, the Guardian has learned.
Ministers had planned to convert a number of existing testing sites into centres for lateral flow tests, which provide results in 30 minutes, to help cope with an anticipated surge in demand.
However, the scheme was halted last week after concerns were raised by directors of public health about the accuracy of the tests and the potential false reassurance given to people who test negative. A government source said the planned rollout “proved unnecessary”.
Let’s get right into the fluff of the swab on this one.
The rapid tests can be as low as 50% accurate? The upper end on these is what?
Is a 50% accurate test better or worse than no test?
Has anyone had one?
Worse, if it gives false negatives, because it means people who might have been isolating due to symptoms don’t.
This is a fairly damning article on why using it in schools (for example) is not a smart idea for that reason.
What about used in combination for stronger guidance. Is it/Could it be combined with questionnaire whilst you are waiting?
I mean if testresult said no, but you answered yes to feeling worse than you ever have, lost all smell and taste, and spent all night on pot whilst projectile vomiting into sink, they would be mad to send you away with all clear wouldn’t’ they?
No, because many people including many superspreaders have quite mild symptoms.
Is that the reason the test accuracy is so low, it struggles to pick those up?
Given the last time a teacher was made SoS for Education in this country it was an even worse shambles than usual, I’ll suspend judgement on that.
Also been a school principal, district administrator and assistant superintendent, as well as adjunct professor before being named Connecticut’s state chief last year, so I think probably a little better than Estelle.
Dan Goldin was the expert - "The smartest guy in the room" - who as a NASA administrator turned the manned space program into a total mess.
Jim Bridenstine was a political hack, appointed by Donald Fucking Trump. Who has done an outstanding job.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
I didn't say anything about in short order. I would estimate 5-10 years.
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
Weren’t you arguing exactly the opposite of that a few days back when you said Parliament could abrogate international treaties at will ?
A concept which didn’t seem to bother you in the least back then.
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
Weren’t you arguing exactly the opposite of that a few days back when you said Parliament could abrogate international treaties at will ?
A concept which didn’t seem to bother you in the least back then.
Hard to avoid the conclusion Macron isn't using the lorry blockage as extra leverage to get what he wants in the final Brexit deal.
He's holding out.
Absolutely. Manny is the hero of every remainer this evening, killing no deal more with every lorry.
If French Presidential communications were to be leaked and it were revealed that Macron had said about the new covid strain "Super, punissons les trous du cul anglais pour le Brexit", would we have a case for suing France for the costs of this freight blockage?
Isn't the idiom trous noirs anglais?
It's a disappointing French idiom if so! I just google translated this, but I do love many French idioms. "Avoir le cul bordé de nouilles" (To have an arse surrounded by noodles = to be very lucky). "L'esprit d'escalier" (The ghost of the staircase - when you think of the perfect riposte after the conversation is over so the ghost on the staircase has just told you it). And so many more..
Esprit = wit, not ghost.
Noted thanks. I thought it was spirit (which I think it can translate as) and I thought ghost..
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
Weren’t you arguing exactly the opposite of that a few days back when you said Parliament could abrogate international treaties at will ?
A concept which didn’t seem to bother you in the least back then.
Dishonesty from Brexiteers? Shocking
Philip is not dishonest in the least. Just occasionally inconsistent.
Probably because they think everyone would ignore it. Meanwhile, if they lock down after Christmas there’s a chance people might listen.
I think that is right - everyone has decided what they're doing for Christmas now.
And if you start any sort of restriction with mass disobedience, it’s very hard to get compliance later.
Unfortunately, the government’s remarkably insouciant response to their own rules and constant politicking and u-turns hasn’t exactly made people anxious to listen either.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
I didn't say anything about in short order. I would estimate 5-10 years.
You also thought Brexit would never happen, despite the vote for Leave, because it was impossible.
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
Weren’t you arguing exactly the opposite of that a few days back when you said Parliament could abrogate international treaties at will ?
A concept which didn’t seem to bother you in the least back then.
Dishonesty from Brexiteers? Shocking
Philip is not dishonest in the least. Just occasionally inconsistent.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
It is the right thing to do, it's clearly time.
Maybe where you are. Here in Dorset, not so much.
It's proactive, it's only going to get worse if we don't take action now. This has been the problem since day 1, we've consistently acted far too late.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
The Tier system has comprehensively failed. It's time to accept that.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
The Tier system has comprehensively failed. It's time to accept that.
Yet it works in other countries. Shutting down the entire country for an outbreak in one part is not the answer.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
The Tier system has comprehensively failed. It's time to accept that.
Yet it works in other countries. Shutting down the entire country for an outbreak in one part is not the answer.
It's not an outbreak in one place, it's spreading everywhere.
You have your point of view, I think it's going to come to be a very poor one. We will see.
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
Weren’t you arguing exactly the opposite of that a few days back when you said Parliament could abrogate international treaties at will ?
A concept which didn’t seem to bother you in the least back then.
Dishonesty from Brexiteers? Shocking
Philip is not dishonest in the least. Just occasionally inconsistent.
Well I respectfully disagree with that.
You are dishonest not me.
You fallaciously accused me of denying others the right to explain why they vote the way they do - which is a lie since that goes against everything I believe in.
I am a liberal. I am a democrat. I believe firmly and passionately in free speech, as Voltaire said. I believe firmly and passionately in democracy. I would rather lose an election and see my worst opponents win than lose the right to free speech or the right to vote for those that set our laws.
I have over 46k posts on this site. I challenge you to find a single one EVER were I have denied others the right to speak for themselves. I challenge you to find a single one ever were I deny others the right to explain how and why they voted as they did?
To deny others the right to vote. To deny others the right to speak ... That goes against the my very core of my beliefs and everything I argue for. So why would you falsely accuse me of that? Why make up lies about me?
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
Mister Horse has a point tho. In this case.
Supercovid is a beast. We can see it in our data. It is horribly infectious. It has reached Cumbria, Scotland, Devon. And it’s rampant
There is, therefore, every reason to believe it will soon spread everywhere. So maybe, for a change, we should get ahead of the curve and lockdown before the inevitable train wreck occurs. A nationwide lockdown will also be more effective than pointless and piecemeal Tiers.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
The Tier system has comprehensively failed. It's time to accept that.
Yet it works in other countries. Shutting down the entire country for an outbreak in one part is not the answer.
It's not an outbreak in one place, it's spreading everywhere.
You have your point of view, I think it's going to come to be a very poor one. We will see.
Then that argues for an adjustment to the restrictions in each region. It doesn't mean one size fits all.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
The Tier system has comprehensively failed. It's time to accept that.
Yet it works in other countries. Shutting down the entire country for an outbreak in one part is not the answer.
It's not an outbreak in one place, it's spreading everywhere.
You have your point of view, I think it's going to come to be a very poor one. We will see.
Then that argues for an adjustment to the restrictions in each region. It doesn't mean one size fits all.
I think a regional approach simply doesn't work, as I said, we will see.
Of course in hindsight Labour should have just abstained on May's deal or quietly had the Northern MPs vote for it, that was a real misstep. I got that totally wrong.
Yes. With hindsight that would have been a good play. But this IS all hinsdsight. At the time we had a PM and a government in the hole. Oppositions do not tend to dig them out of it. Especially when they are polling ok, as Labour were at that point. They were focused on getting an election and winning it.
It's not all hindsight. I was advising Labour's best course was to abstain at the time, ad nauseum. Brexit would than have been a Blue on Blue shitfest.
I still believe Corbyn wanted to ensure Brexit happened, one way or another. He didn't really care how hard it was.
The irony of course is that Corbyn's gut instinct was right on this one issue and he was making Labour abstain early on.
It was Starmer that was a leading advocate for the second referendum die hard remainerism and rejecting May's deal. Corbyn abandoned his own principles - for possibly the only time in 40 years of politics - and paid the price for doing so.
May's deal was shit. It's not the job of the opposition to vote for things they don't support because the government can't get its own side to vote for it and might be stupid enough to do something totally suicidal instead. Labour gave the government an opportunity to vote for a genuine compromise that respected the referendum result and the Tories whipped their MPs to vote against it. None of this is the fault of anyone outside of the Conservative Party.
The Tory Eurosceptics are getting exactly what they wanted despite not having the numbers in Parliament to do it.
Thank you for that. Years ago on this site I was a lone Leaver opposing all the way May's deal and I was being told by fellow Leavers time and again we wouldn't get anything more to my liking because there were not enough MPs in Parliament to facilitate that.
Well as it happened there were. Labour, LDs, TIG etc take a bow - by marching through the lobbies with Steve Baker etc look what you have brought about. I thank you for it.
They played very high stakes poker. I assumed (because of the numbers in parliament) we must lose but they were £4k up and decided to risk it all to play for the £100k grand prize.
They left with their bus fare home.
I see the ridiculous gaslighting continues. The people who are responsible for Brexit are those who voted and/or campaigned for Cameron, Brexit, May and Johnson. No-one else. Brexit is yours, for better or worse. For God's sake, have the guts to own it.
You say that but how many Tories rejected May's deal at Meaningful Vote 3 as they were die hard adamant it wasn't hard enough - as I was here at the time?
Only 34 Tories rejected it at Meaningful Vote 3. And that includes Dominic Grieve and co.
My viewpoint - that May's deal was an unacceptable betrayal - was represented by fewer than 30 Tories at MV3. But those less than 30 MPs are getting an exit more to their and my liking.
There are over 600 MPs in Parliament. That is an incredible, incredible victory for a vote of fewer than 30.
You are all talking about May`s deal as though it were a trade deal. May`s deal was a withdrawal agreement/transition agreement, just as Johnson`s was. If May`s deal was being proceeded with instead of Johnson`s we would be in a similar position as now wouldn`t we - trying to negotiate a trade deal?
No because May's deal was a trap. We would have been stuck in the godawful backstop forever with no way out unless the EU deigned to let us out. No chance of walking away, no Article 50, no unilateral exit. We would have been prisoners and supplicants who could only leave if Barnier or his successor decided we could. Oh and 27 nations could all veto us being able to leave it. We would be powerless and helpless at their mercy.
Weren’t you arguing exactly the opposite of that a few days back when you said Parliament could abrogate international treaties at will ?
A concept which didn’t seem to bother you in the least back then.
In domestic law yes, not international law.
To abrogate out of a customs union unilaterally would put us in complete violation of everything in international law that makes free trade agreements possible. We wouldn't have our own WTO listing of tariffs etc that we do now. We wouldn't be able to sign agreements with Japan etc as we would be under international law within the EUs customs union.
To abrogate domestically is a hell of a lot easier than abrogating internationally.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
The Tier system has comprehensively failed. It's time to accept that.
Yet it works in other countries. Shutting down the entire country for an outbreak in one part is not the answer.
It's not an outbreak in one place, it's spreading everywhere.
You have your point of view, I think it's going to come to be a very poor one. We will see.
Then that argues for an adjustment to the restrictions in each region. It doesn't mean one size fits all.
I think a regional approach simply doesn't work, as I said, we will see.
I don't think the answer will be definitive, because it is a combination of a regional approach with the right restrictions. You could have regional restrictions that are completely useless, that doesn't mean the regional approach is not the right one, it just means the restrictions applied are not effective.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
I didn't say anything about in short order. I would estimate 5-10 years.
It'd be short order compared to how long we had to wait to reconsider our initial decision to join (or stay forced in; we didn't get given a real choice to join did we?)
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
I wish I had listened to you. I apologise.
You don't have anything to apologise for. MPs, however.
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
Mister Horse has a point tho. In this case.
Supercovid is a beast. We can see it in our data. It is horribly infectious. It has reached Cumbria, Scotland, Devon. And it’s rampant
There is, therefore, every reason to believe it will soon spread everywhere. So maybe, for a change, we should get ahead of the curve and lockdown before the inevitable train wreck occurs. A nationwide lockdown will also be more effective than pointless and piecemeal Tiers.
Yes. Very reluctantly I must agree with you and Horse. He is the Horse who cried Lockdown. As in the original eventually he was correct. Today's numbers were horrific.
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
Mister Horse has a point tho. In this case.
Supercovid is a beast. We can see it in our data. It is horribly infectious. It has reached Cumbria, Scotland, Devon. And it’s rampant
There is, therefore, every reason to believe it will soon spread everywhere. So maybe, for a change, we should get ahead of the curve and lockdown before the inevitable train wreck occurs. A nationwide lockdown will also be more effective than pointless and piecemeal Tiers.
Yes. Very reluctantly I must agree with you and Horse. He is the Horse who cried Lockdown. As in the original eventually he was correct. Today's numbers were horrific.
Thanks, I know my prediction record has not always been stellar but if you look back at my posts, if we were locking down when I was calling for it, we would have been in a better position.
I'm not happy about that as it means more people have died and others will have their mental health impacted. But it is reality.
I hope you're well BTW, haven't seen you so much lately.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
I didn't say anything about in short order. I would estimate 5-10 years.
You also thought Brexit would never happen, despite the vote for Leave, because it was impossible.
In his various guises 'Leon' has had more positions than the kama sutra.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
I wish I had listened to you. I apologise.
You don't have anything to apologise for. MPs, however.
I think it is right to acknowledge when you are wrong and hold your hands up. I hope most here would acknowledge that is something I do often.
They have no food, no water, and no toilets. It is a disgraceful failure of basic welfare, we should be ashamed. It may not be “our” fault but these are people trying to do an honest job on UK soil.
Not too bad. However, percentage rise in 7 days: 68%, and accelerating.
Changes in restrictions take nearly two weeks to filter into those numbers, so 250...300 is probably already locked in.
When R is above 1, delaying measures does nothing but making the problem worse, and the economic gain of waiting a couple of weeks is all too quickly outweighed by both the health costs and the economic costs of the longer lockdown that is needed to bring the numbers back down.
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
It is the right thing to do, it's clearly time.
Maybe where you are. Here in Dorset, not so much.
Trouble is, it's spreading pretty fast westwards (starting in Kent) along the south coast and could reach Dorset sooner than you think. A few weeks ago there were hardly any cases in Hastings at all; now, it is one of the worst places in the country. Cases, and proportions, have shot up from very low numbers in Eastbourne, Brighton, Crawley, Lewes - so it's already spread from Kent to throughout Sussex. Portsmouth is already struggling with high numbers, so is Southampton. Bournemouth has had a lot of cases already. So I don't think Dorset is immune (!) at all.
It does appear that areas in Tier 2 that are adjacent to areas in Tier 4 are seeing exponential growth, and of course that will ripple out swiftly.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
I wish I had listened to you. I apologise.
You don't have anything to apologise for. MPs, however.
I think it is right to acknowledge when you are wrong and hold your hands up. I hope most here would acknowledge that is something I do often.
Well you only joined after May had been defenestrated, so hard to see how you can be held culpable!
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
I didn't say anything about in short order. I would estimate 5-10 years.
It'd be short order compared to how long we had to wait to reconsider our initial decision to join (or stay forced in; we didn't get given a real choice to join did we?)
Your implication being that the U.K. wasn’t a true democracy?
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
Agreed.
And I argued at the time that it wasn’t ever going to be the prison that Philip claims - for precisely the reasons he was arguing recently.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
I wish I had listened to you. I apologise.
You don't have anything to apologise for. MPs, however.
I think it is right to acknowledge when you are wrong and hold your hands up. I hope most here would acknowledge that is something I do often.
Well you only joined after May had been defenestrated, so hard to see how you can be held culpable!
Well I certainly did hold the view I outlined despite not being a member here. I was lurking.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
Agreed.
And I argued at the time that it wasn’t ever going to be the prison that Philip claims - for precisely the reasons he was arguing recently.
Philip is completely incoherent, he changes his view on international law depending on whether it's something he agrees with or not.
Not too bad. However, percentage rise in 7 days: 68%, and accelerating.
Changes in restrictions take nearly two weeks to filter into those numbers, so 250...300 is probably already locked in.
When R is above 1, delaying measures does nothing but making the problem worse, and the economic gain of waiting a couple of weeks is all too quickly outweighed by both the health costs and the economic costs of the longer lockdown that is needed to bring the numbers back down.
That is a lesson I thought we’d learned in the spring.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
Yes great to default to be inside something we want to leave. 🤦🏻♂️
The Irish backstop default was pretty much 100% what the Leave campaign, and Eurosceptics generally, had been asking for over years, or indeed much better: outside the CFP and CAP, outside the political structures of the EU, without freedom of movement obligations, without budget contributions, free of ever-closer union, with no vestige of obligations on getting involved in bail-outs, and all this with full access to the Single Market. The ultimate cherry-pick.
May's deal getting pushback from both remainers and leavers was what convinced me it was as good as it would get.
I wish I had listened to you. I apologise.
You don't have anything to apologise for. MPs, however.
I think it is right to acknowledge when you are wrong and hold your hands up. I hope most here would acknowledge that is something I do often.
Well then do you have the decency to.do so regarding falsely accusing me of denying others the right to explain why they vote the way they do?
Everyone has the right to vote for whatever reasons they want. That is their choice not mine and I would never in a million years deny that to others yet that is what you falsely claimed.
Do you have the decency to admit you were wrong and making false accusations?
Not too bad. However, percentage rise in 7 days: 68%, and accelerating.
Changes in restrictions take nearly two weeks to filter into those numbers, so 250...300 is probably already locked in.
When R is above 1, delaying measures does nothing but making the problem worse, and the economic gain of waiting a couple of weeks is all too quickly outweighed by both the health costs and the economic costs of the longer lockdown that is needed to bring the numbers back down.
Indeed.
Like @Mortimer, I also live in Dorset. I would support a tier 4 lockdown across the country.
I can see no reason why Dorset will not be susceptible.
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
It is the right thing to do, it's clearly time.
Maybe where you are. Here in Dorset, not so much.
Trouble is, it's spreading pretty fast westwards (starting in Kent) along the south coast and could reach Dorset sooner than you think. A few weeks ago there were hardly any cases in Hastings at all; now, it is one of the worst places in the country. Cases, and proportions, have shot up from very low numbers in Eastbourne, Brighton, Crawley, Lewes - so it's already spread from Kent to throughout Sussex. Portsmouth is already struggling with high numbers, so is Southampton. Bournemouth has had a lot of cases already. So I don't think Dorset is immune (!) at all.
It does appear that areas in Tier 2 that are adjacent to areas in Tier 4 are seeing exponential growth, and of course that will ripple out swiftly.
Yes. The idea that Dorset will somehow be immune is..... quirky. To put it nicely.
I love Dorset. One of the most quietly beautiful corners of Europe. But I don’t remember it being surrounded by a county-sized hazmat suit that will protect it, unlike Sussex or Bucks.
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
Mister Horse has a point tho. In this case.
Supercovid is a beast. We can see it in our data. It is horribly infectious. It has reached Cumbria, Scotland, Devon. And it’s rampant
There is, therefore, every reason to believe it will soon spread everywhere. So maybe, for a change, we should get ahead of the curve and lockdown before the inevitable train wreck occurs. A nationwide lockdown will also be more effective than pointless and piecemeal Tiers.
Yes. Very reluctantly I must agree with you and Horse. He is the Horse who cried Lockdown. As in the original eventually he was correct. Today's numbers were horrific.
Thanks, I know my prediction record has not always been stellar but if you look back at my posts, if we were locking down when I was calling for it, we would have been in a better position.
I'm not happy about that as it means more people have died and others will have their mental health impacted. But it is reality.
I hope you're well BTW, haven't seen you so much lately.
Yes thanks. We know what the definition of insanity is. Maybe for once we should try getting ahead of the game and locking down hard and early. Even if it is too early for some places. Leaving it till forced to (My instinctive preference), has not been a stellar success. This time. Ban unnecessary foreign travel. A crackdown on businesses which don't comply. And a serious consideration of schools.
They have no food, no water, and no toilets. It is a disgraceful failure of basic welfare, we should be ashamed. It may not be “our” fault but these are people trying to do an honest job on UK soil.
Agreed.
And aside from the moral disgrace, as @RochdalePioneers pointed out, should we No Deal, it’s going to be quite difficult to persuade a lot of continental hauliers to bother visiting the UK. More so now.
I assume the French and others will have lost their rights to fish in UK waters altogether then
This is an elephant-sized trap for the Prime Minister. If he sticks to his "no extension" guns, the EU and some in this country will criticise him (perhaps fairly) for walking away when a Deal was within reach. If he continues the negotiation, the Faragists will claim he is back-sliding on his EU principals, he's selling out and not to be trusted.
CHB is obsessed with lockdowns. He calls for them about 3 times daily atm.
Mister Horse has a point tho. In this case.
Supercovid is a beast. We can see it in our data. It is horribly infectious. It has reached Cumbria, Scotland, Devon. And it’s rampant
There is, therefore, every reason to believe it will soon spread everywhere. So maybe, for a change, we should get ahead of the curve and lockdown before the inevitable train wreck occurs. A nationwide lockdown will also be more effective than pointless and piecemeal Tiers.
Yes. Very reluctantly I must agree with you and Horse. He is the Horse who cried Lockdown. As in the original eventually he was correct. Today's numbers were horrific.
Thanks, I know my prediction record has not always been stellar but if you look back at my posts, if we were locking down when I was calling for it, we would have been in a better position.
I'm not happy about that as it means more people have died and others will have their mental health impacted. But it is reality.
I hope you're well BTW, haven't seen you so much lately.
Yes thanks. We know what the definition of insanity is. Maybe for once we should try getting ahead of the game and locking down hard and early. Even if it is too early for some places. Leaving it till forced to (My instinctive preference), has not been a stellar success. This time. Ban unnecessary foreign travel. A crackdown on businesses which don't comply. And a serious consideration of schools.
The main argument against lockdown is economic. To put it bluntly, however, the economy is fecked anyway. So lockdown.
Also, medically and sociologically, the New Mutant Strain is seemingly so evil the only choice is lockdown. Other countries that have contracted the strain (Ireland, for example) are making this dire decision right now.
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
I didn't say anything about in short order. I would estimate 5-10 years.
It'd be short order compared to how long we had to wait to reconsider our initial decision to join (or stay forced in; we didn't get given a real choice to join did we?)
Your implication being that the U.K. wasn’t a true democracy?
In my lifetime (which started after we joined) I don't think we were on EU related matters until we had the referendum. Blair's betrayal of his promise over the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty really hammered that home for me.
I assume the French and others will have lost their rights to fish in UK waters altogether then
This is an elephant-sized trap for the Prime Minister. If he sticks to his "no extension" guns, the EU and some in this country will criticise him (perhaps fairly) for walking away when a Deal was within reach. If he continues the negotiation, the Faragists will claim he is back-sliding on his EU principals, he's selling out and not to be trusted.
I think it just means they will negotiate after the transition is over, rather than anything about an extension.
They have no food, no water, and no toilets. It is a disgraceful failure of basic welfare, we should be ashamed. It may not be “our” fault but these are people trying to do an honest job on UK soil.
Agreed.
And aside from the moral disgrace, as @RochdalePioneers pointed out, should we No Deal, it’s going to be quite difficult to persuade a lot of continental hauliers to bother visiting the UK. More so now.
It is unacceptable for these truckers to have no facilities and Shapps needs to deal with it
The very important difference is that with May’s deal we defaulted to being inside the Single Market without a further deal. With Johnson’s, we default to outside.
It's blindingly obvious now how much stronger our hand would have been because of that. Theresa May, amazingly, had managed to get the EU to agree to a UK-wide ‘single customs territory’ with full access to the Single Market, while the requirement for regulatory alignment would have been limited to Northern Ireland. The only way they could have got out of that would have been to offer us an even better deal than that.
What’s even more amazing is she had managed to negotiate us out of the CFP.
So it really would have put all the pressure on the EU to find a way forward.
And it was blocked by Parliament. Of course the ERG nutters blocked it, but the remainers in Parliament could have ensured that deal if they weren't so keen on blocking Brexit.
Yes, and having (unlike them) actually read it, I was bloody furious with the lot of them.
Are there anti Brexit people on here that supported the Remainers in Parliament blocking May's deal at the time, and still think they did the right thing?
Are there pro Brexit people on here who wish the Remainers in Parliament had voted for May's deal, despite opposing it at the time?
Maybe, but I'm not one. I wanted them to vote for it. Did you advocate them voting for it?
You seem shy in answering this. I suspect you strongly supported the remainers blocking May's deal and now regret it so deeply you don't want to own it.
I don't regret opposing May's deal and don't mind whether this ends with a deal or no deal because nothing that happens in the next few weeks will settle anything in the long term.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
You do still think Brexit can be blocked don't you?
What do you mean by blocked? Brexit has already happened and I don't think the UK will rejoin as the UK.
So rejoin in short order after a disastrous UK wrecking No Deal? You prefer that to May's deal because May's deal was a workable exit? I think that view sets a benchmark for Remainia
I didn't say anything about in short order. I would estimate 5-10 years.
It'd be short order compared to how long we had to wait to reconsider our initial decision to join (or stay forced in; we didn't get given a real choice to join did we?)
Your implication being that the U.K. wasn’t a true democracy?
In my lifetime (which started after we joined) I don't think we were on EU related matters until we had the referendum. Blair's betrayal of his promise over the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty really hammered that home for me.
Very true. Democracy was denied time and again. Brexit was the explosion of discontent that follows from that.
The final deadline is and always has been 22:59 on the day. If a deal is agreed then there will just be an interim agreement to keep things going for a few days/weeks.
Come back to me in a few weeks, we will regret not taking action now.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
I think the regional approach is better. I think that is how many countries have faced this issue. Locking down the entire country because of an outbreak in one area is a bit of overkill.
The Tier system has comprehensively failed. It's time to accept that.
Yet it works in other countries. Shutting down the entire country for an outbreak in one part is not the answer.
It's not an outbreak in one place, it's spreading everywhere.
You have your point of view, I think it's going to come to be a very poor one. We will see.
Then that argues for an adjustment to the restrictions in each region. It doesn't mean one size fits all.
I think a regional approach simply doesn't work, as I said, we will see.
The regional approach worked ok in Scotland. The problem is that the increased transmissibility of the new virus renders anything below tier 4 insufficient to keep R below 1, so I agree it needs to be tier 4 everywhere now.
And the jury is out on whether tier 4 is enough. Good job it will effectively be tier 5 for the next couple weeks due to the school holidays. God help us if that's not enough.
They have no food, no water, and no toilets. It is a disgraceful failure of basic welfare, we should be ashamed. It may not be “our” fault but these are people trying to do an honest job on UK soil.
Obviously they are getting emotional. Their families too, probably even their employers.
What happens then when our government gets a dual carriageway full of positive test results, and hands them out to these people?
Comments
Vote in Georgia runoff election and win a Tesla.
https://electrek.co/2020/12/22/2-chainz-tesla-model-3-giveaway-benefit-tesla/
Bond to Disney then?
My hypothesis is, a test looking for antibodies will have a harder hunt in someone displaying no symptoms, but easier one in someone with nose oozing, coughing wheezing, phlegm dripping from their ears.
What do you think?
I have no further questions at this time 🙂
Not only would we have been trapped in it, we would have become the only country in the planet in the customs union that we had already voted to leave who lacked a unilateral exit. Of the 29 nations in the customs union there would have been the EU27 with Article 50, Turkey who could give notice to leave whenever they chose and us as the sole members with no unilateral exit mechanism.
If the deal was so fantastic why deny the UK a unilateral exit? Why deny us a notification clause that even full EU members have?
Antigen and RNA tests (such at RT-PCR) will only detect those currently infected, not those infected and recovered. Antigen tests tend to be less sensitive and may only work well with those with high viral loads. PCR tests are extremely (overly) sensitive and are the gold standard for testing those currently infected.
The reason the sensitivity of the rapid test drops from lab use, to trained personnel use, to public use is down to poorer collection of the specimen by the less trained persons in less ideal circumstances.
The biggest tactical mistake the Remainers in Parliament made was the Benn act which let Boris Johnson off the hook. They should have left No Deal on the table.
I'm having my first ever venison this evening
Jim Bridenstine was a political hack, appointed by Donald Fucking Trump. Who has done an outstanding job.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13550674/new-covid-strain-map-places-spreading-rapidly-england/
More? Why not the whole of England?
Lockdown now.
A concept which didn’t seem to bother you in the least back then.
Just occasionally inconsistent.
Unfortunately, the government’s remarkably insouciant response to their own rules and constant politicking and u-turns hasn’t exactly made people anxious to listen either.
Time to lockdown the entirety of England.
https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1341446447045087232
You have your point of view, I think it's going to come to be a very poor one. We will see.
You fallaciously accused me of denying others the right to explain why they vote the way they do - which is a lie since that goes against everything I believe in.
I am a liberal. I am a democrat. I believe firmly and passionately in free speech, as Voltaire said. I believe firmly and passionately in democracy. I would rather lose an election and see my worst opponents win than lose the right to free speech or the right to vote for those that set our laws.
I have over 46k posts on this site. I challenge you to find a single one EVER were I have denied others the right to speak for themselves. I challenge you to find a single one ever were I deny others the right to explain how and why they voted as they did?
To deny others the right to vote. To deny others the right to speak ... That goes against the my very core of my beliefs and everything I argue for. So why would you falsely accuse me of that? Why make up lies about me?
Supercovid is a beast. We can see it in our data. It is horribly infectious. It has reached Cumbria, Scotland, Devon. And it’s rampant
There is, therefore, every reason to believe it will soon spread everywhere. So maybe, for a change, we should get ahead of the curve and lockdown before the inevitable train wreck occurs. A nationwide lockdown will also be more effective than pointless and piecemeal Tiers.
Doesn't mean it won't happen. But tbh it is looking unlikely. This whole blockade narrative isn't helping.
To abrogate out of a customs union unilaterally would put us in complete violation of everything in international law that makes free trade agreements possible. We wouldn't have our own WTO listing of tariffs etc that we do now. We wouldn't be able to sign agreements with Japan etc as we would be under international law within the EUs customs union.
To abrogate domestically is a hell of a lot easier than abrogating internationally.
Do you see the distinction?
EU willing to negotiate beyond 1st January
I assume the French and others will have lost their rights to fish in UK waters altogether then
https://twitter.com/RussellNicholls/status/1341417138582597632
He is the Horse who cried Lockdown. As in the original eventually he was correct.
Today's numbers were horrific.
I'm not happy about that as it means more people have died and others will have their mental health impacted. But it is reality.
I hope you're well BTW, haven't seen you so much lately.
Cases/week/100000: 74
Not too bad. However, percentage rise in 7 days: 68%, and accelerating.
Changes in restrictions take nearly two weeks to filter into those numbers, so 250...300 is probably already locked in.
When R is above 1, delaying measures does nothing but making the problem worse, and the economic gain of waiting a couple of weeks is all too quickly outweighed by both the health costs and the economic costs of the longer lockdown that is needed to bring the numbers back down.
It does appear that areas in Tier 2 that are adjacent to areas in Tier 4 are seeing exponential growth, and of course that will ripple out swiftly.
And I argued at the time that it wasn’t ever going to be the prison that Philip claims - for precisely the reasons he was arguing recently.
I find that troubling.
Everyone has the right to vote for whatever reasons they want. That is their choice not mine and I would never in a million years deny that to others yet that is what you falsely claimed.
Do you have the decency to admit you were wrong and making false accusations?
Like @Mortimer, I also live in Dorset. I would support a tier 4 lockdown across the country.
I can see no reason why Dorset will not be susceptible.
I love Dorset. One of the most quietly beautiful corners of Europe. But I don’t remember it being surrounded by a county-sized hazmat suit that will protect it, unlike Sussex or Bucks.
We know what the definition of insanity is.
Maybe for once we should try getting ahead of the game and locking down hard and early.
Even if it is too early for some places. Leaving it till forced to (My instinctive preference), has not been a stellar success.
This time. Ban unnecessary foreign travel. A crackdown on businesses which don't comply.
And a serious consideration of schools.
And aside from the moral disgrace, as @RochdalePioneers pointed out, should we No Deal, it’s going to be quite difficult to persuade a lot of continental hauliers to bother visiting the UK.
More so now.
Also, medically and sociologically, the New Mutant Strain is seemingly so evil the only choice is lockdown. Other countries that have contracted the strain (Ireland, for example) are making this dire decision right now.
And the jury is out on whether tier 4 is enough. Good job it will effectively be tier 5 for the next couple weeks due to the school holidays. God help us if that's not enough.
What happens then when our government gets a dual carriageway full of positive test results, and hands them out to these people?
😟