I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
The European Parliament can look at it as much as it wants but not even the Brussels media correspondents are suggesting anything other than this will pass their Parliament
You do not like Brexit , you do not want Brexit, and that is your long held position but on the 1st January 2021 the UK will be outside of the EU and an independent state
A series of non sequiturs culminating in a silly rant.
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
Actually it does show the European Parliament is irrelevant if all 27 countries agree a course of action
These complaints about having to declare 10k betwixt NI and rUK (Yes officer it's for Cheltenham), fishermen being better off than they were in the EU whilst maintaining tariff and quota free access to the EU sound like bleatings of the defeated to me.
Question. Whom should I believe about the finances of fishermen.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Given your laughable constituency modelling at the last general election, I would have thought it was you who needed to spend a good few months curled up with a good book on Bayesian statistics.
With a bit of luck, the removal of the "EU bogeyman" will help us focus on what WE need to do......educate our workforce, make stuff the world wants....
Nah, folk will still blame the EU.
It has never been obvious to me how losing European markets helps gain any market elsewhere.
The main drive for Brexit has always been envy, and for those struggling in left behind areas to take their revenge on their fellow countrymen who have done well in recent years. No-one hates their fellow countryman more than a "patriotic" flag waving Brexiteer.
Brexit was and is a passive aggressive identity project founded on exceptionalism. This is how I have come to see and understand it. Lots of granular drivers in there, including those you refer to, but for me the overriding umbrella sentiment powering it through to its fruition on Christmas Eve is the feeling that we are not really European. We are England and we're English, both of which are something a little bit special to be. EU membership might be all very well for your run-of-the-mill continentals but not for this sceptered isle. This is a seductive notion. It's bullshit imo but I do recognize its appeal.
Brexit was fathered by nostalgic Tories who saw Britain as a global power unfairly shackled to a “sclerotic” Franco-German hegemon. This was - to their way of thinking - a break on natural British competitiveness *and* unseemly for a country of Britain’s exceptionalism.
This mindset - grossly out of date by 2016, if it was ever true - always had a latent hold on suburban and provincial Tory thinking, hence even places like Surrey voting 48% Leave.
But that alone was insufficient to win Brexit.
The other part of the story is 25 years of a globalised economic order (willingly embraced by both Tories and Labour) which has seen clear benefits to London, and the abandonment of much of the rest of the country.
Large scale emigration - effectively part of the same story - from about 2000 - created the “casus bellum” for the man on the Boston omnibus.
In this analysis, interestingly, Boris is not a true Brexiter, just an opportunist who knows his audience.
I agree with all of this. But the exceptionalism you reference in your 1st para also has a strong hold amongst working class leavers. Yes, there was a response to being left out of the globalized knowledge economy, but there was plenty of "We stood alone in 1940, we can do it again. Bring it on!" to add to that.
There was also a widely heard sentiment of bugger all gratitude for the vast amounts of blood and treasure the UK spilled to get the Nazi jackboot off Europe's neck.
It would have been a masterstroke by the EU to have a European Gratitude bank holiday, where Europe gave thanks for its freedoms - and to those that had won them. With the Union flag flying high in every town square across the EU.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
I think one of the positive things now that Brexit is done and dusted (almost) is that our politicians no longer have the excuse of hiding behind the EU for saying why they can't do things.
Why do you think that they were so keen to have a deal?
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
Failing to scrutinise the deal now will delegitimise it every time one of its grubby compromises comes to light or causes a political flashpoint. It's entirely self-defeating, even though its passing is a certainty.
With a bit of luck, the removal of the "EU bogeyman" will help us focus on what WE need to do......educate our workforce, make stuff the world wants....
Nah, folk will still blame the EU.
It has never been obvious to me how losing European markets helps gain any market elsewhere.
The main drive for Brexit has always been envy, and for those struggling in left behind areas to take their revenge on their fellow countrymen who have done well in recent years. No-one hates their fellow countryman more than a "patriotic" flag waving Brexiteer.
Brexit was and is a passive aggressive identity project founded on exceptionalism. This is how I have come to see and understand it. Lots of granular drivers in there, including those you refer to, but for me the overriding umbrella sentiment powering it through to its fruition on Christmas Eve is the feeling that we are not really European. We are England and we're English, both of which are something a little bit special to be. EU membership might be all very well for your run-of-the-mill continentals but not for this sceptered isle. This is a seductive notion. It's bullshit imo but I do recognize its appeal.
Brexit was fathered by nostalgic Tories who saw Britain as a global power unfairly shackled to a “sclerotic” Franco-German hegemon. This was - to their way of thinking - a break on natural British competitiveness *and* unseemly for a country of Britain’s exceptionalism.
This mindset - grossly out of date by 2016, if it was ever true - always had a latent hold on suburban and provincial Tory thinking, hence even places like Surrey voting 48% Leave.
But that alone was insufficient to win Brexit.
The other part of the story is 25 years of a globalised economic order (willingly embraced by both Tories and Labour) which has seen clear benefits to London, and the abandonment of much of the rest of the country.
Large scale emigration - effectively part of the same story - from about 2000 - created the “casus bellum” for the man on the Boston omnibus.
In this analysis, interestingly, Boris is not a true Brexiter, just an opportunist who knows his audience.
I agree with all of this. But the exceptionalism you reference in your 1st para also has a strong hold amongst working class leavers. Yes, there was a response to being left out of the globalized knowledge economy, but there was plenty of "We stood alone in 1940, we can do it again. Bring it on!" to add to that.
There was also a widely heard sentiment of bugger all gratitude for the vast amounts of blood and treasure the UK spilled to get the Nazi jackboot off Europe's neck.
It would have been a masterstroke by the EU to have a European Gratitude bank holiday, where Europe gave thanks for its freedoms - and to those that had won them. With the Union flag flying high in every town square across the EU.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Bayes doesn't begin to be relevant. Be a selfish arse if you like, but stop trying to be clever about it.
I don’t understand why the “fisherfolk” are upset. Although Britain clearly compromised a lot from a maximalist approach, the deal agreed is surely much better than remaining inside the CFA.
They were promised so much more.
That will be the difficulty for the government. As far as I can tell, the government achieved its own aims ie a deal which said how much it respected Britain's sovereignty - hence all the warm words from Ursula on this.
But it is the gap between what it promised its voters - or what they thought it promised them - and what it actually delivers which will determine how successful it is. Or is perceived to be.
And that will not be assessed now but in the weeks and months ahead.
Thee will be three levels of assessment:
(1) Does it avoid chaos or anticipated difficulties? (2) Does it impose extra bureaucracy and costs on exporters and who bears those costs? (3) Does it bring benefits for people which the government could not previously have done because the EU prevented it and do those benefits accrue to those who voted for Brexit?
(1) Probably - by comparison with No Deal. (2) Yes - Michael Gove was proudly proclaiming this today. A mixture of exporters and consumers will bear the costs. (3) Who knows. We already had here yesterday people claiming that making it easier for non-EU spouses of British citizens to live here was an advantage of Brexit when in fact the EU did not prevent this at all. I expect more such claims. What other advantages there will be and who benefits remains to be seen.
(3) was a real issue the EU did prevent by displacement.
When we were giving unlimited free movement to 6% of the world's population, no questions asked . . . combined with repeated commitments to try to contain net migration . . . then the only way to contain net migration was to considerably overtighten the screws on the other 93% world's population.
One argument Priti Patel made during the referendum was that it would be easier to loosen immigration controls on the rest of the world if they are tightened with the EU, to keep balance. She has done that since taking office, keeping to her promises made during the referendum.
The EU did not prevent this. It was Britain's decision to limit non-EU migration and Britain's alone. It was Britain's decision to make a promise to limit migration. This is a typical example of Brexiteers trying to blame the EU for something which was entirely in the control of the British government. There was no EU law or requirement which stopped Mrs Sandpit from living in the U.K. with Mr Sandpit. To coin a phrase, the British government had complete control over the domestic laws which prevented this. The government chose not to exercise that control. The excuses they gave them and their supporters are giving now do not change this fact.
It was Britain's in the context that the British voters want net migration contained but aren't especially bothered how it seems - so by enforcing zero pressure on one side the government had no choice but to go over the top on the other side.
By leaving the EU we have the ability - which we lacked before - to equalise EU and Rest of the World migration requirements thus loosening rest of the world restrictions while tightening elsewhere without seeing a major change in net migration as the two cancel each other out.
Its the real world solution that is often required - like with the R rate that if you want schools open completely that may mean closing bars and restaurants completely to counteract that - with commensurate knock on effects for those who have a business running a bar or a restaurant.
It is deeply unrealistic to say "the UK chose not to exercise controls" when the UK was incapable of doing so for many so was overreacting to the rest.
Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.
John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".
He says that even a deal will be a disaster if we are outside of the customs area.
Tesco's in we will enforce our current prices even (especially if) we drive our suppliers to bankruptcy shock...
Presumably we can now import cheaper food from elsewhere in the world, if we want to
How does that work then? What food (a) can we now import that we couldn't before and (b) why is it now cheaper? We already import a lot of food from across the world.
Anyway, judging by the dismal quality of what passes for debate round here this morning, it'll be quite a while before I'm back below the line again. Happy New Year all.
EU's 27 member states unanimously approve post Brexit deal
It means the agreement can come into operation on New Year's Day ahead of European Parliament approval in February
And so the page finally turns on Brexit
And the EU Parliament is once again given all the respect it has earned.
The EU Parliament has proven to be remarkably flexible too, considering until so recently we were told none of this approval process could possibly happen until some distant point in 2021.....
Actually the European Parliament have been sidelined by the 27 member states's unanimous agreement and they have to wait until February before they have their say which judging by all the Brussels correspondents will rubber stamp the deal
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
The problem is the travel. You actually have to get to an airport, get in a plane, get in a taxi, etc.
You don't magically get from Barnes to a ski slope in Verbier. There is the bit in between.
That's true if you go anywhere. It's not just skiing. I'd rather be in a plane with hepa filtered air than on the London tube. I haven't been on the tube since March and don't intend to until I've had my jabs.
But I have two ski trips planned and paid for in March and April after my jabs.
Not true if you stay at home, which you somehow think is less safe than going on a skiing trip.
Depends what you do at home . I try to get out in the fresh air as much as I can.
At age 77, I definitely intend to avoid catching this damn thing and I take all precautions and follow all rules. Nevertheless, if I've had the jab and it's open and within the rules I'll go skiing next Spring.
It's the spluttering indignation that amuses me. Skiing - wankers.
I think the indignation is not only limited to skiers.
Stupid and selfish behaviour is quite common. Perhaps a quarter of the population, including a fair number of Leavers enjoying exercise free winter sun.
Of course, you are right that irresponsible behaviour is not confined to the skiers, though the latter have been very conspicuous in their bad behaviour.
Given your earlier comments on the Daily Markle, I was a bit disappointed to find you linking to it for "evidence". 😀The video has faces blocked out, but it does look like a young person's party -- and what are we always told about age and Remain/Leave?
For the avoidance of doubt, anyone flouting regulations (Leaver or Remainer) should be fined heavily.
We know the addresses of the skiers in Verbier from their hotel bookings. They can be followed up & fined & told to quarantine in the UK. Henceforth, they are confined to their mansions in the LibDem strongholds in Twickenham & Barnes for a few weeks.
And as a man of science, I note that you haven't commented on Wera and her support for the 5G conspiracy whack-jobs?
The largest problem with COVID in the UK is that precautions are for everyone else. And saying "But Cummings" as a response to why you had to have a holiday or invite 75 close friends round into your living room isn't an excuse.
EDIT "Daily Markle" is this a popular name for Der Sturmer? Or did you just invent that? If so, nice.
Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.
John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".
He says that even a deal will be a disaster if we are outside of the customs area.
Tesco's in we will enforce our current prices even (especially if) we drive our suppliers to bankruptcy shock...
Presumably we can now import cheaper food from elsewhere in the world, if we want to
How does that work then? What food (a) can we now import that we couldn't before and (b) why is it now cheaper? We already import a lot of food from across the world.
No longer subject to EU customs Union tariffs and quotas.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
Anyway, judging by the dismal quality of what passes for debate round here this morning, it'll be quite a while before I'm back below the line again. Happy New Year all.
I'd just like to know what we can now do outside of the EU that is going to benefit me please. Genuine and serious question, will await your responses with interest.
"Mr Locker said he was not aware of any allowance in the trade deal for UK firms to trade fish quotas with EU countries, which is a crucial part of how the industry manages it catch.
He said many fishing firms would go out of business by the end of the transition in 2026, telling the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: “We are really, really going to struggle this year.”
The dumb fucks in the government grandstanding about fishing didn't have a clue how the industry works. They have won back the sold stolen quotas and now the fishing folk can keep them. Sorry, what do you mean they want to trade them? They are BRITISH. We won!
Bloody remoaning fishermen.
So they are angry because they can no longer sell their fishing quotas to non UK fishermen....
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
Failing to scrutinise the deal now will delegitimise it every time one of its grubby compromises comes to light or causes a political flashpoint. It's entirely self-defeating, even though its passing is a certainty.
Nice to see you contributing below the line Alastair but I'm afraid I disagree. The reality is that Parliaments of any stripe are completely useless at making treaties or trade agreements. By the time it gets to them there is nothing to discuss. Those "grubby compromises" are made to get the deal over the line and need to be made by those with executive authority. The choice for Parliaments is yes or no, not renegotiation so focusing on any of those compromises is a bit of a waste of time.
In this case the question is deal or no deal and you would have to be as stupid as the SNP to vote for the latter.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
Oh, and Erasmus isn't a gap year! I spent a year studying physics in German, and it was one of the most academically challenging years of my life. The exams I took during my Erasmus year counted towards my final degree.
I don't think anyone is saying you can't talk about it, but the rhetoric floating about is akin to saying that we were wrong to leave because of this decision and it should be reversed because of this.
Erasmus is a good thing overall and it's great that you and thousands of others benefitted from it, but to the average person in the street it means absolutely nothing and it's not something even a significant minority of students used even when we were in the EU.
Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.
John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".
He says that even a deal will be a disaster if we are outside of the customs area.
Tesco's in we will enforce our current prices even (especially if) we drive our suppliers to bankruptcy shock...
Presumably we can now import cheaper food from elsewhere in the world, if we want to
How does that work then? What food (a) can we now import that we couldn't before and (b) why is it now cheaper? We already import a lot of food from across the world.
No longer subject to EU customs Union tariffs and quotas.
So, if its a food and a country that had an EU tariff then we would have fallen back onto the WTO tariff? Or negotiated a new tariff?
As we haven't negotiated a single new trade deal that does anything more than roll the existing terms over, and as any EU negotiated terms would be lower than the WTO terms as otherwise why would anyone sign them, I still don't know what you are suggesting in practice.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
You're happy to take risks with other people's health. It's a sickening attitude and not a very liberal one.
Exercise some self-restraint for the common good. Please.
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
Failing to scrutinise the deal now will delegitimise it every time one of its grubby compromises comes to light or causes a political flashpoint. It's entirely self-defeating, even though its passing is a certainty.
Although this deal has it appears a 12 month exit clause. If MPs find something in a few months they dislike then they can invoke the 12 month exit clause and we can move on.
Which is why its entirely rational to use all the time available for negotiations to get a better deal than to make grubby compromises sooner.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
My brother did an exchange research year in Venezuela (back before it all went to shit there) - Erasmus is only one of a number of such schemes.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.
John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".
He says that even a deal will be a disaster if we are outside of the customs area.
Tesco's in we will enforce our current prices even (especially if) we drive our suppliers to bankruptcy shock...
Presumably we can now import cheaper food from elsewhere in the world, if we want to
How does that work then? What food (a) can we now import that we couldn't before and (b) why is it now cheaper? We already import a lot of food from across the world.
No longer subject to EU customs Union tariffs and quotas.
So, if its a food and a country that had an EU tariff then we would have fallen back onto the WTO tariff? Or negotiated a new tariff?
As we haven't negotiated a single new trade deal that does anything more than roll the existing terms over, and as any EU negotiated terms would be lower than the WTO terms as otherwise why would anyone sign them, I still don't know what you are suggesting in practice.
It's an article of faith for many Brexiteers that customs union = protectionist tariff wall. They don't actually care about the details.
Who is this thread writer and what have they done with OGH?
Seriously, it's a pleasure to occasionally read something positive, and it speaks to Boris' character as a man and as Prime Minister. Occasionally hit-and-miss on mundane details, his genius lies in making the big calls and cutting Gordian knots.
While others tried to bind him in inextricable legalese, he exerted himself Samson-like to bring the whole temple down upon them and win a landslide.
While others were debating whether Dom Cummings driving to Durham was worse than Hitler's invasion of Poland, Boris was ordering hundreds of millions of doses of the vaccines that are the only real way out of the pandemic.
While some either wanted him to extend the trade talks (likely indefinitely) and others wanted him to blow them up entirely, Boris landed a solid agreement and got Brexit done exactly as he promised, despite the pandemic, despite nearly dying, despite everything.
And that's just his first 18 months in office. No doubt he will continue to be underestimated for the remainder of his tenure.
He did play a blinder to get the job and then win his landslide. It was a 24 carat genuine top notch political achievement. But all bar the blinkered and the prop mongers will stop right there. He has made a hash of the pandemic (inc the Cummings debacle). And he's made a meal of getting a simple, unambitious trade deal with the EU. It really is nothing to write home about. Sorry. Nice try though, and it's fine to give this stuff a whirl.
It’s good if the public mood is lifted. But I have to hope that people appreciate that in the last 3 weeks the R has increased, the infection rate has increased, and the number of people with the infection has increased. And probably at least 6 more weeks of vaccination is needed for that to make a difference. Let greater cheer not lead to greater breaking of the Tier 4 rules.
"Mr Locker said he was not aware of any allowance in the trade deal for UK firms to trade fish quotas with EU countries, which is a crucial part of how the industry manages it catch.
He said many fishing firms would go out of business by the end of the transition in 2026, telling the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: “We are really, really going to struggle this year.”
The dumb fucks in the government grandstanding about fishing didn't have a clue how the industry works. They have won back the sold stolen quotas and now the fishing folk can keep them. Sorry, what do you mean they want to trade them? They are BRITISH. We won!
Bloody remoaning fishermen.
So they are angry because they can no longer sell their fishing quotas to non UK fishermen....
As I understand it (and I'm not a fisherman) we generally catch stuff we don't eat and vice versa. You can't tell fish where to swim so you end up catching fish you don't want.
Currently we do swapsies - let us catch some of your quota of stuff we want and you catch some of our quota of stuff you want. Except that it would appear that stops on Friday as the government haven't preserved the right to do so. Which leaves fishing boats free to catch more fish that people don't want to eat.
Again, I am willing to take the expert word of the industry about their industry over armchair experts in keyboard warriorship. I notice Philip berating me on his rather extreme spin on my comments on supermarkets. Having negotiated with all the big supermarkets including price increases where we put one of the big boys (JS not Tesco) on stop, I do know a bit more about this than Philip does.
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.
John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".
Yet again those with BDS have overplayed their hand with their predictions of food shortages and food price rises.
FWIW the price of the EU made dishwasher I intended to buy increased on Christmas Eve by 10%. I am pretty certain that price rise is caused by extra import costs. They probably waited until the deal was signed, otherwise the price would have increased more.
Is Brexit Derangement Syndrome still a thing? ie directed at those that accurately point to the many downsides and the total lack of any upside?
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
But it sounds like it will be affirmative action, perhaps by allowing different numbers from different universities. if Erasmus was perfectly designed, then why were those taking advantage of it often more well-off?
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
The problem is the travel. You actually have to get to an airport, get in a plane, get in a taxi, etc.
You don't magically get from Barnes to a ski slope in Verbier. There is the bit in between.
That's true if you go anywhere. It's not just skiing. I'd rather be in a plane with hepa filtered air than on the London tube. I haven't been on the tube since March and don't intend to until I've had my jabs.
But I have two ski trips planned and paid for in March and April after my jabs.
Not true if you stay at home, which you somehow think is less safe than going on a skiing trip.
Depends what you do at home . I try to get out in the fresh air as much as I can.
At age 77, I definitely intend to avoid catching this damn thing and I take all precautions and follow all rules. Nevertheless, if I've had the jab and it's open and within the rules I'll go skiing next Spring.
It's the spluttering indignation that amuses me. Skiing - wankers.
I think the indignation is not only limited to skiers.
Stupid and selfish behaviour is quite common. Perhaps a quarter of the population, including a fair number of Leavers enjoying exercise free winter sun.
Of course, you are right that irresponsible behaviour is not confined to the skiers, though the latter have been very conspicuous in their bad behaviour.
Given your earlier comments on the Daily Markle, I was a bit disappointed to find you linking to it for "evidence". 😀The video has faces blocked out, but it does look like a young person's party -- and what are we always told about age and Remain/Leave?
For the avoidance of doubt, anyone flouting regulations (Leaver or Remainer) should be fined heavily.
We know the addresses of the skiers in Verbier from their hotel bookings. They can be followed up & fined & told to quarantine in the UK. Henceforth, they are confined to their mansions in the LibDem strongholds in Twickenham & Barnes for a few weeks.
And as a man of science, I note that you haven't commented on Wera and her support for the 5G conspiracy whack-jobs?
OK I'm up for that. I'm in the mood this pseudopublic holiday.
Cohen conflates the crackpot ideas of XAnon linking 5G to Covid-19 and other conspiracy ideas with the legimate concern of parents objecting to 5G masts near schools invoking the precautionary principle. The two things are completely separate and he knows it.
He then dismisses the precautionary principle as follows:
"By citing the precautionary principle, she [the libDem MP] could say she was keeping an open mind, as so many do when faced with dangerous ideas it is risky to oppose. The best reply to anyone who passes off cowardice as open-mindedness is the old advice not to be so open-minded that your brains fall out."
What!! I wonder what he thinks about applying the precautionary principle in other areas such as global warming?
If you read the icnirp report on 5G it is looks impressive though hard for the layman to understand. https://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPrfgdl2020.pdf It says: "Initial measurement studies suggest that exposure from 5G antennas will be approximately similar to that from 3G and 4G antennas." It also says: " A key feature of the 5G wireless standard is that it will use beam-forming technology, which allows for the RF EMFs to be focused to the region where it is needed (e.g. to a person using a mobile phone), rather than being spread out over a large area."
Wow - the beam is focused on you rather than the inverse square law. It only mentions potential harm from heat but not from ionising radiation.
And what is 5G for anyway? Downloading films in one second instead of ten seconds? The internet of things? Personally I can do without 5G. You need many more stations all over urban areas for little benefit. No thanks. Because the technology exists, it doesn't mean you have to use it or even support it.
People have the right to object to a new technology where the benefits are unclear and the science is hard to understand.
Cohen shouldn't be berating the LibDems in Bath but the mobile phone companies for not adequating explaining the science and reassuring the public. Cohen just wants to shut down dissent. I think it is called "cancelling". As a Liberal I follow JSMill on non-suppression of opinion.
If you are going to suppress dissent who is going to decide what to suppress? Boris? I hope Philip is on my side and Mills.
I suspect 5G almost certainly isn't harmful but why take the risk? I don't see the benefit. Those who can, can argue for the masts.
Incidentally, in Bath, the recorded reasons in the minutes are (a) inappropriate development in the green belt and (b) visual impact on the AONB and landscape. So, at least formally, nothing to do with the topics Cohen raises.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
My brother did an exchange research year in Venezuela (back before it all went to shit there) - Erasmus is only one of a number of such schemes.
Was your brother a penniless undergraduate at the time?
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
Oh, and Erasmus isn't a gap year! I spent a year studying physics in German, and it was one of the most academically challenging years of my life. The exams I took during my Erasmus year counted towards my final degree.
But the issue is that the UK is far more interesting to Erasmus students from abroad than UK students going abroad.
There are probably far better ways of doing the same thing and you have to remember a lot of our Russell group universities are actually global brands with multiple campuses around the world.
Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.
John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".
Yet again those with BDS have overplayed their hand with their predictions of food shortages and food price rises.
FWIW the price of the EU made dishwasher I intended to buy increased on Christmas Eve by 10%. I am pretty certain that price rise is caused by extra import costs. They probably waited until the deal was signed, otherwise the price would have increased more.
Is Brexit Derangement Syndrome still a thing? ie directed at those that accurately point to the many downsides and the total lack of any upside?
Pointless red tape costs money. Logistics costs money. Business isn't going to just take a margin hit, its going to put up prices. Everyone is doing a Brexit price increase to pass on their costs, the only variable would be if costs go up even more and a further price rise is needed.
My industry contacts in white goods are in the middle of the same price increase negotiations as pretty much everyone else in Food / General Merchandise is or have completed them in December.
With a bit of luck, the removal of the "EU bogeyman" will help us focus on what WE need to do......educate our workforce, make stuff the world wants....
Nah, folk will still blame the EU.
It has never been obvious to me how losing European markets helps gain any market elsewhere.
The main drive for Brexit has always been envy, and for those struggling in left behind areas to take their revenge on their fellow countrymen who have done well in recent years. No-one hates their fellow countryman more than a "patriotic" flag waving Brexiteer.
Brexit was and is a passive aggressive identity project founded on exceptionalism. This is how I have come to see and understand it. Lots of granular drivers in there, including those you refer to, but for me the overriding umbrella sentiment powering it through to its fruition on Christmas Eve is the feeling that we are not really European. We are England and we're English, both of which are something a little bit special to be. EU membership might be all very well for your run-of-the-mill continentals but not for this sceptered isle. This is a seductive notion. It's bullshit imo but I do recognize its appeal.
Brexit was fathered by nostalgic Tories who saw Britain as a global power unfairly shackled to a “sclerotic” Franco-German hegemon. This was - to their way of thinking - a break on natural British competitiveness *and* unseemly for a country of Britain’s exceptionalism.
This mindset - grossly out of date by 2016, if it was ever true - always had a latent hold on suburban and provincial Tory thinking, hence even places like Surrey voting 48% Leave.
But that alone was insufficient to win Brexit.
The other part of the story is 25 years of a globalised economic order (willingly embraced by both Tories and Labour) which has seen clear benefits to London, and the abandonment of much of the rest of the country.
Large scale emigration - effectively part of the same story - from about 2000 - created the “casus bellum” for the man on the Boston omnibus.
In this analysis, interestingly, Boris is not a true Brexiter, just an opportunist who knows his audience.
I agree with all of this. But the exceptionalism you reference in your 1st para also has a strong hold amongst working class leavers. Yes, there was a response to being left out of the globalized knowledge economy, but there was plenty of "We stood alone in 1940, we can do it again. Bring it on!" to add to that.
There was also a widely heard sentiment of bugger all gratitude for the vast amounts of blood and treasure the UK spilled to get the Nazi jackboot off Europe's neck.
It would have been a masterstroke by the EU to have a European Gratitude bank holiday, where Europe gave thanks for its freedoms - and to those that had won them. With the Union flag flying high in every town square across the EU.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
The Insurance segment of the services market has been trading on hard Brexit lines for a fair while now.
There is no way that that EU countries could provide the capacity needed to shut us out of the market in any event.
If we think back to the talk of disaster and grounded planes etc from earlier this year I just have to laugh
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Immaterial and your attempted defence is shameful. He voted on a treaty in Parliament as an MP and then proudly proclaimed he had done so without ever having even read it. Given how important these treaties are to British law, boasting you have not read it is the same as saying you simply don't care about who runs the country. Which in the case of Clarke of course was and is true.
Vaccine rollout will be the big story of 2021. Unfortunately (predictions follow) - it is not going to go smoothly.
The target of getting 25m at risk population by April will be missed. The logistical challenges are considerable and this govt's delivery record questionable. Vaccine will end up being wasted. It will be hard to identify the right people. There will be another IT debacle.
But most importantly - the manufacturers will not make the promised orders at the promised time - they are already missing them. We will see political pressure to help certain countries first regardless of existing orders.
Lockdown 3 will be lifted too early and as a result we will have Lockdown 4. Calls to vaccinate health workers earlier will intensify. Sadly as many people will die of COVID in 2021 in the UK as in 2020.
The bright news is that the vaccine will work and life will return to normality by next Winter. The economy will come roaring back once the virus is beaten.
In domestic politics, Boris Johnson will come under pressure from the ERG to seize the opportunities of Brexit, such as they are. To head off criticism, he will reshuffle his cabinet and make Priti Patel chancellor.
Relations with the EU will, after an initial honeymoon period, deteriorate as both sides claim the other is not respecting the deal. Both sides will make legal threats. To increase the UK's leverage, Boris Johnson will aggressively pursue a US trade deal, exacerbating relations with Europe.
Brexit will however increasingly come to be accepted by the majority. Starmer will pick a fight with Tony Blair/Alastair Campbell and demote anyone suggesting the UK should rejoin.
Overall 2021 will not be the tonic of a year people are hoping for. The struggle against the virus will consume most of it.
You're a bundle of cheer!
One thing - I really don't understand your prediction on COVID deaths if you also think the vaccine will be effective. It will take a serious change in the nature of the virus for this to happen given the demographics of who it kills. Vaccine delays may impact how soon we can start opening up and get back to normal. It's going to have to start killing under 70s in significant numbers for it to beat 2020 on deaths isn't it?
Think it depends how long the vaccine will take to roll out. Plus remember vaccinated people will still die from COVID and most people still haven't got the disease yet.
I think this Winter will be really bad. More people in hospital with COVID now than at start of March lockdown + a more virulent strain + we aren't yet in national lockdown.
We have better treatments but I think likely 2nd wave will be worse.
I wouldn't be quite so pessimistic, but think that you are closer to the truth than the Daily Express, "back to normal by Feb" headlines.
Then there is the massive legacy to deal with. Lots of disability alongside all the deaths. The massive waiting lists and backlogs of other diseases*, the closed businesses that will never re-open, reduced tax receipts for both business and personal tax, and masses and masses of government debt. The big cloud may be that perhaps the virus ain't done with mutating just yet.
* 70% fewer diagnoses of diabetes type 2 this year for example.
Normal is never coming back, at least not for me. For example, my firm has got out of its London leases retain one building. We’re all working at home 3/5 from next year. We’re not alone. That’s a lot of sandwiches not bought.
Retail likewise needs to up its online offer or go to the wall. Apart from food 95% of my spend has been online and almost exclusively with free delivery or free pick up.
The move online is now unstoppable. A few challenges though: 1. How to operate a pick model. Supermarkets take orders online and then pay someone to walk round the shop picking orders. People then complain about cross-offs and substitutes as "I ordered a week ago" - the picker can only pick what is there the same as if you went round the store in person. Or you could shut the store and operate as a warehouse but the same problem is there.
Alternately run centralised warehouses and have local pick points, which is how the likes of Currys are operating in a "closed shop but you can collect" environment. In effect the retail estates of so many of these chains isn't just worthless, it actively costs them money.
2. Online loses money. Until the start of the pandemic each online shop cost the retailer between £5 and £10. The more they do online the more money it costs them - and there's only so many efficiencies the extra volume can unlock. You could try and charge people the actual delivery cost and they would refuse it. This is a big problem for anyone who isn't Amazon - they can afford to make a huge loss delivering things as the rest of their empire is profitable.
3.Strategically the move online absolutely fucks our economy. We are a service led shopping economy built on moving people to places to work and shop and consume. If they don't need to travel as much to work then less need to spend £lots on twatty coffee in expensive offices and shopping. How do we employ all the people who used to service our "needs" when we long since decided to sell off our capacity to actually make things?
1 - Do they? Is "pick in shop" still a thing? Perhaps for short delay Click'n'Collect?
Ocado services Morrisons and M&S.
And I can recall Tesco switching from a "pick in shop" model used in the early days to give a rapid startup to central warehouses. Quite some time ago.
3 - Not convinced. AFAICS we are the most developed E-Commerce economy in Europe. Town centres etc will change of course.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
Ummm...what about the City of Edinburgh, previously Europe’s third or fourth largest financial centre, depending on how you measure it?
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Immaterial and your attempted defence is shameful. He voted on a treaty in Parliament as an MP and then proudly proclaimed he had done so without ever having even read it. Given how important these treaties are to British law, boasting you have not read it is the same as saying you simply don't care about who runs the country. Which in the case of Clarke of course was and is true.
Yeah, Alastair's point was that MPs wouldn't read it. I would suggest the vast majority of MEPs also won't read it nor understand it. They'll get their take from twitter.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
My brother did an exchange research year in Venezuela (back before it all went to shit there) - Erasmus is only one of a number of such schemes.
Was your brother a penniless undergraduate at the time?
Even more penniless post grad. All paid for (in rather royal style) by a bilateral arrangement, IIRC.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
Oh, and Erasmus isn't a gap year! I spent a year studying physics in German, and it was one of the most academically challenging years of my life. The exams I took during my Erasmus year counted towards my final degree.
But the issue is that the UK is far more interesting to Erasmus students from abroad than UK students going abroad.
There are probably far better ways of doing the same thing and you have to remember a lot of our Russell group universities are actually global brands with multiple campuses around the world.
I'm just saying it as a see it. For me, Erasmus was part of the path out of working class poverty to a new life. It was one of the few ways of properly experiencing another culture and learning another language that didn't require money or connections. My Erasmus year was the first time I'd ever been abroad.
Any changes to food prices after Brexit are likely to be "very modest indeed" under the deal struck between the UK and the EU, the chairman of Tesco has said.
John Allan told the BBC that it would "hardly be felt in terms of the prices that consumers are paying".
Yet again those with BDS have overplayed their hand with their predictions of food shortages and food price rises.
FWIW the price of the EU made dishwasher I intended to buy increased on Christmas Eve by 10%. I am pretty certain that price rise is caused by extra import costs. They probably waited until the deal was signed, otherwise the price would have increased more.
Is Brexit Derangement Syndrome still a thing? ie directed at those that accurately point to the many downsides and the total lack of any upside?
Pointless red tape costs money. Logistics costs money. Business isn't going to just take a margin hit, its going to put up prices. Everyone is doing a Brexit price increase to pass on their costs, the only variable would be if costs go up even more and a further price rise is needed.
My industry contacts in white goods are in the middle of the same price increase negotiations as pretty much everyone else in Food / General Merchandise is or have completed them in December.
Indeed. As a consumer the effect of Brexit is to make me £30 poorer on that transaction. That's £30 I don't have to spend to spend on something else. The dishwasher is the same. This effect multiplies across everything I buy.
Truss really has done a fantastic job this year, following the mess Liam Fox left at the department. This was the last of the agreements waiting wasn't it?
To be fair since Turkey is in the EU Customs Union this will be more of a copy and paste job which is why it couldn't be done before the EU Agreement - but still, its remarkable how little Fox got done and she has gotten it all done in 11 months.
Same as how well Frost has done compared to Robbins. What a difference in outlook compared to this time two years ago when May had survived her No Confidence vote but had no real authority.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
Surely, to explain why they are net beneficiaries?
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Immaterial and your attempted defence is shameful. He voted on a treaty in Parliament as an MP and then proudly proclaimed he had done so without ever having even read it. Given how important these treaties are to British law, boasting you have not read it is the same as saying you simply don't care about who runs the country. Which in the case of Clarke of course was and is true.
Margaret Thatcher never read the Single European Act in full either.
The point he compared it to was getting a mortgage, he said you never read the small print, you read the summaries.
Thatcher said, and I paraphrase, you trust the government lawyers and civil service, and they were very competent in delivering the goals of the PM.
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
I am reminded of Spinal Tap's manager on hearing that the gig in Boston has been cancelled.
"Don't worry, it's not a big college town..."
Don't worry about fishing, it's better than it might have been...
Don't worry about fashion, Milan is bigger anyway...
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Immaterial and your attempted defence is shameful. He voted on a treaty in Parliament as an MP and then proudly proclaimed he had done so without ever having even read it. Given how important these treaties are to British law, boasting you have not read it is the same as saying you simply don't care about who runs the country. Which in the case of Clarke of course was and is true.
But every single mp in the House is being made to vote, tomorrow, on a treaty they have not read (because it's impossible in the time allowed), so what is your point?
Anyway, judging by the dismal quality of what passes for debate round here this morning, it'll be quite a while before I'm back below the line again. Happy New Year all.
Deary me.
Well generally your contributiuons above the line are much more balanced so it's a win, win for me.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Bayes doesn't begin to be relevant. Be a selfish arse if you like, but stop trying to be clever about it.
Bayes is relevant. There is currently very little evidence about transmission after the jab. But there is a prior. If the vaccine stimulates the T-Cells and generates antibodies to the virus, sufficient to stop symptoms it is likely to reduce or eliminate viral load and transmission by asymptotics. There isn't evidence for that yet, and certainly no evidence against it. As evidence accumulates, and it will quickly, the prior will be updated.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
My brother did an exchange research year in Venezuela (back before it all went to shit there) - Erasmus is only one of a number of such schemes.
Was your brother a penniless undergraduate at the time?
Even more penniless post grad. All paid for (in rather royal style) by a bilateral arrangement, IIRC.
Erasmus is specifically aimed at undergraduates, so your brother's case isn't really relevant. Obviously postgrads can go all over the place as part of their research.
I'd just like to know what we can now do outside of the EU that is going to benefit me please. Genuine and serious question, will await your responses with interest.
Me, me, me that's all we get from the modern Labour party these days.
I'd just like to know what we can now do outside of the EU that is going to benefit me please. Genuine and serious question, will await your responses with interest.
Whatever you elect MPs to do.
Anything you choose. It is up to you. You have taken back control.
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Immaterial and your attempted defence is shameful. He voted on a treaty in Parliament as an MP and then proudly proclaimed he had done so without ever having even read it. Given how important these treaties are to British law, boasting you have not read it is the same as saying you simply don't care about who runs the country. Which in the case of Clarke of course was and is true.
But every single mp in the House is being made to vote, tomorrow, on a treaty they have not read (because it's impossible in the time allowed), so what is your point?
Their choice how they vote on it.
If they want to vote it down they can choose to do so. If they want to vote it through they can choose to do so.
Plus if in January they choose they don't like the deal and want to invoke the 12 month exit clause they can choose to do so.
The MPs have the choice. Not Boris alone. There are 650 elected MPs and barring exceptions like the Speaker not voting the decision is in their hands nobody elses.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
"Foreign policy cooperation" should have the square root of f all to do with a trade agreement - don't you agree?
If we want to cooperate in foreign policy we should do so on a case-by-case basis on matter that interest us, like climate change etc - and that should be done globally not just on a continent basis.
I'd just like to know what we can now do outside of the EU that is going to benefit me please. Genuine and serious question, will await your responses with interest.
Me, me, me that's all we get from the modern Labour party these days.
It is nailed on we are getting Tier 4++++ it is just when. I wonder if we get Oxford vaccine announcement tomorrow, we will get it then i.e. its the Calvary is on the way, but we need you to lockdown for another 2 months.
With a bit of luck, the removal of the "EU bogeyman" will help us focus on what WE need to do......educate our workforce, make stuff the world wants....
Nah, folk will still blame the EU.
It has never been obvious to me how losing European markets helps gain any market elsewhere.
The main drive for Brexit has always been envy, and for those struggling in left behind areas to take their revenge on their fellow countrymen who have done well in recent years. No-one hates their fellow countryman more than a "patriotic" flag waving Brexiteer.
Brexit was and is a passive aggressive identity project founded on exceptionalism. This is how I have come to see and understand it. Lots of granular drivers in there, including those you refer to, but for me the overriding umbrella sentiment powering it through to its fruition on Christmas Eve is the feeling that we are not really European. We are England and we're English, both of which are something a little bit special to be. EU membership might be all very well for your run-of-the-mill continentals but not for this sceptered isle. This is a seductive notion. It's bullshit imo but I do recognize its appeal.
I am not sure that really answers it; many of the French feel the same about being French in my experience, ditto the Germans.
Patriotism. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.
They do. As do all nations. So it's a matter of degree. Is our exceptionalism more strongly felt than theirs? Is it a rather exceptional brand of exceptionalism? I think it is. This is why they don't feel EU membership dampens their national identity and prospects whereas we do. We feel boxed in and disrespected. We feel we have enormous potential that EU membership is preventing us from unleashing. We feel SPECIAL. More so than others. A good reference for Brexit imo is the L'Oreal hair advert. Why are we Leaving? Because we're worth it.
Exceptionalism? Or just difference? Certainly our legal system is different, apart from possibly Scotland. Maybe we just have different viewpoints on economic issues, political freedom, individualism v corporatism, preference for the Anglophone world, etc. It doesn't make us better, just different.
"Once freed from the EU's shackles we can unleash our true potential."
This sentiment - at the heart of Johnson's GE19 pitch - implies difference AND superiority.
The EU are the Supremes in our mind's eye and we are Diana Ross.
I don't think it will be an effective one. Macron, who wants more integration pretty much everywhere else, wants France to retain its unilateral foreign policy making powers. Why would we write anything into our agreement with the EU about foreign policy alignment when even France won't from within?
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Immaterial and your attempted defence is shameful. He voted on a treaty in Parliament as an MP and then proudly proclaimed he had done so without ever having even read it. Given how important these treaties are to British law, boasting you have not read it is the same as saying you simply don't care about who runs the country. Which in the case of Clarke of course was and is true.
But every single mp in the House is being made to vote, tomorrow, on a treaty they have not read (because it's impossible in the time allowed), so what is your point?
Their choice how they vote on it.
If they want to vote it down they can choose to do so. If they want to vote it through they can choose to do so.
Plus if in January they choose they don't like the deal and want to invoke the 12 month exit clause they can choose to do so.
The MPs have the choice. Not Boris alone. There are 650 elected MPs and barring exceptions like the Speaker not voting the decision is in their hands nobody elses.
Look, I am more than five years old. I do not need a dim, misconceived and just plain wrong ELI5 from you on this or indeed any other subject.
I do think it is dreadful that the EU treats its own parliament so shabbily by endorsing the deal without them even having a say. Thank heavens things are done differently in the UK.
A hit, a hit, a palpable hit. LOL.
We can only assume Cyclefree et al are too upset and angry to comment............
Afternoon. I drop by, only to find that sadly the pair of you have made asses of yourselves. This is provisional application only on the EU side. In theory at least, the European Parliament still has the power to vote the deal down and it will be examining it in some detail early next year.
Meanwhile, Westminster is rubberstamping the deal as a pig in a poke in a day. Not one MP will have read the deal through. Not one MP will understand what they are approving.
Neither approach is an advertisement for democratic process but at least the European Parliament is getting to look at the matter properly at some point.
British politics is turning into autocracy punctuated by political assassinations, and is looking very sickly indeed.
Whilst I actually agree that we should give Parliament time for proper assessment and debate and also that they should have the final - informed - say, I cannot help but remember that arch Europhile Ken Clarke boasted that he passed the Maastricht Treaty without even having bothered to read it.
That Ken Clarke quote is one of those quotes shamelessly taken out of context.
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Immaterial and your attempted defence is shameful. He voted on a treaty in Parliament as an MP and then proudly proclaimed he had done so without ever having even read it. Given how important these treaties are to British law, boasting you have not read it is the same as saying you simply don't care about who runs the country. Which in the case of Clarke of course was and is true.
But every single mp in the House is being made to vote, tomorrow, on a treaty they have not read (because it's impossible in the time allowed), so what is your point?
My point was to highlight the fact that some of our most devoted Europhile MPs have not worried in the past about being able to study the detail of treaties even when they got the opportunity. Just so long as they were part of further EU integration.
If you bothered to look at my original reply to Alastair I made it explicit that MPs should be given all the time they need to study this treaty before being asked to vote on it. Indeed it is their duty to do so and the Government is wrong to force this through when we could have a provisional acceptance as the EU Parliament is providing.
With a bit of luck, the removal of the "EU bogeyman" will help us focus on what WE need to do......educate our workforce, make stuff the world wants....
Nah, folk will still blame the EU.
It has never been obvious to me how losing European markets helps gain any market elsewhere.
The main drive for Brexit has always been envy, and for those struggling in left behind areas to take their revenge on their fellow countrymen who have done well in recent years. No-one hates their fellow countryman more than a "patriotic" flag waving Brexiteer.
Brexit was and is a passive aggressive identity project founded on exceptionalism. This is how I have come to see and understand it. Lots of granular drivers in there, including those you refer to, but for me the overriding umbrella sentiment powering it through to its fruition on Christmas Eve is the feeling that we are not really European. We are England and we're English, both of which are something a little bit special to be. EU membership might be all very well for your run-of-the-mill continentals but not for this sceptered isle. This is a seductive notion. It's bullshit imo but I do recognize its appeal.
Brexit was fathered by nostalgic Tories who saw Britain as a global power unfairly shackled to a “sclerotic” Franco-German hegemon. This was - to their way of thinking - a break on natural British competitiveness *and* unseemly for a country of Britain’s exceptionalism.
This mindset - grossly out of date by 2016, if it was ever true - always had a latent hold on suburban and provincial Tory thinking, hence even places like Surrey voting 48% Leave.
But that alone was insufficient to win Brexit.
The other part of the story is 25 years of a globalised economic order (willingly embraced by both Tories and Labour) which has seen clear benefits to London, and the abandonment of much of the rest of the country.
Large scale emigration - effectively part of the same story - from about 2000 - created the “casus bellum” for the man on the Boston omnibus.
In this analysis, interestingly, Boris is not a true Brexiter, just an opportunist who knows his audience.
I agree with all of this. But the exceptionalism you reference in your 1st para also has a strong hold amongst working class leavers. Yes, there was a response to being left out of the globalized knowledge economy, but there was plenty of "We stood alone in 1940, we can do it again. Bring it on!" to add to that.
There was also a widely heard sentiment of bugger all gratitude for the vast amounts of blood and treasure the UK spilled to get the Nazi jackboot off Europe's neck.
It would have been a masterstroke by the EU to have a European Gratitude bank holiday, where Europe gave thanks for its freedoms - and to those that had won them. With the Union flag flying high in every town square across the EU.
We'd still be in.
Yes. Again you make my point but in the sort of full-blooded Leaver language that I cannot pull off without looking like I'm taking the piss.
On a security/foreign policy note, over Christmas, OneWeb (now 20% owned by the UK government) launched 35 more satellites.
Using a launch via Arianespace. The launcher is actual Russian - Arianespace made a deal with the Russians to use Soyuz as a the low cost launcher in their portfolio.
The restart of launches means revenue for Arianespace - and a few sighs of relief. Their launch portfolio was starting to look quite thin.
Oh, and OneWeb satellite construction is moving to the UK. From the US.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
The fishing industry was in the CFP so were banned by the EU from catching large quantities of fish from UK waters, they will now be able to catch more of their own fish from UK waters.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!
Comments
Fishermen?
Or PB "experts"?
It would have been a masterstroke by the EU to have a European Gratitude bank holiday, where Europe gave thanks for its freedoms - and to those that had won them. With the Union flag flying high in every town square across the EU.
We'd still be in.
By leaving the EU we have the ability - which we lacked before - to equalise EU and Rest of the World migration requirements thus loosening rest of the world restrictions while tightening elsewhere without seeing a major change in net migration as the two cancel each other out.
Its the real world solution that is often required - like with the R rate that if you want schools open completely that may mean closing bars and restaurants completely to counteract that - with commensurate knock on effects for those who have a business running a bar or a restaurant.
It is deeply unrealistic to say "the UK chose not to exercise controls" when the UK was incapable of doing so for many so was overreacting to the rest.
EDIT "Daily Markle" is this a popular name for Der Sturmer? Or did you just invent that? If so, nice.
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-turing-scheme-to-support-thousands-of-students-to-study-and-work-abroad
https://twitter.com/JP_Biz/status/1343488213810352128
https://twitter.com/SimonJonesNews/status/1343531099360813057?s=20
Or 9% of the French current COVID positivity rate.....
In this case the question is deal or no deal and you would have to be as stupid as the SNP to vote for the latter.
Erasmus is a good thing overall and it's great that you and thousands of others benefitted from it, but to the average person in the street it means absolutely nothing and it's not something even a significant minority of students used even when we were in the EU.
As we haven't negotiated a single new trade deal that does anything more than roll the existing terms over, and as any EU negotiated terms would be lower than the WTO terms as otherwise why would anyone sign them, I still don't know what you are suggesting in practice.
Exercise some self-restraint for the common good. Please.
Which is why its entirely rational to use all the time available for negotiations to get a better deal than to make grubby compromises sooner.
But I have to hope that people appreciate that in the last 3 weeks the R has increased, the infection rate has increased, and the number of people with the infection has increased. And probably at least 6 more weeks of vaccination is needed for that to make a difference.
Let greater cheer not lead to greater breaking of the Tier 4 rules.
Currently we do swapsies - let us catch some of your quota of stuff we want and you catch some of our quota of stuff you want. Except that it would appear that stops on Friday as the government haven't preserved the right to do so. Which leaves fishing boats free to catch more fish that people don't want to eat.
Again, I am willing to take the expert word of the industry about their industry over armchair experts in keyboard warriorship. I notice Philip berating me on his rather extreme spin on my comments on supermarkets. Having negotiated with all the big supermarkets including price increases where we put one of the big boys (JS not Tesco) on stop, I do know a bit more about this than Philip does.
The SNP, the LDs and SDLP and Lucas will likely vote against.
Plaid and the 1 Alliance MP will likely abstain
He was Education Secretary and Home Secretary when the Maastricht Treaty was negotiated and largely passed in the Commons. (He became Chancellor in late May 1993 and the Treaty passed in the House a few weeks later.)
So he only ever read the executive summaries rather than the full treaty as it was a matter for the Foreign Office.
He was backing up the point Margaret Thatcher later made at the Scott inquiry, it was impossible for a PM (and cabinet minister) to read every report and treaty sent to them.
Is Brexit Derangement Syndrome still a thing? ie directed at those that accurately point to the many downsides and the total lack of any upside?
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1343538468304117763
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-trouble-with-erasmus-is-not-just-the-cost
Cohen conflates the crackpot ideas of XAnon linking 5G to Covid-19 and other conspiracy ideas with the legimate concern of parents objecting to 5G masts near schools invoking the precautionary principle. The two things are completely separate and he knows it.
He then dismisses the precautionary principle as follows:
"By citing the precautionary principle, she [the libDem MP] could say she was keeping an open mind, as so many do when faced with dangerous ideas it is risky to oppose. The best reply to anyone who passes off cowardice as open-mindedness is the old advice not to be so open-minded that your brains fall out."
What!! I wonder what he thinks about applying the precautionary principle in other areas such as global warming?
If you read the icnirp report on 5G it is looks impressive though hard for the layman to understand.
https://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPrfgdl2020.pdf
It says:
"Initial measurement studies suggest that exposure from 5G antennas will be approximately similar to that from 3G and 4G antennas."
It also says:
" A key feature of the 5G wireless standard is that it will use beam-forming technology, which allows for the RF EMFs to be focused to the region where it is needed (e.g. to a person using a mobile phone), rather than being spread out over a large area."
Wow - the beam is focused on you rather than the inverse square law. It only mentions potential harm from heat but not from ionising radiation.
And what is 5G for anyway? Downloading films in one second instead of ten seconds? The internet of things?
Personally I can do without 5G. You need many more stations all over urban areas for little benefit. No thanks.
Because the technology exists, it doesn't mean you have to use it or even support it.
People have the right to object to a new technology where the benefits are unclear and the science is hard to understand.
Cohen shouldn't be berating the LibDems in Bath but the mobile phone companies for not adequating explaining the science and reassuring the public. Cohen just wants to shut down dissent. I think it is called "cancelling". As a Liberal I follow JSMill on non-suppression of opinion.
If you are going to suppress dissent who is going to decide what to suppress? Boris? I hope Philip is on my side and Mills.
I suspect 5G almost certainly isn't harmful but why take the risk? I don't see the benefit. Those who can, can argue for the masts.
Incidentally, in Bath, the recorded reasons in the minutes are (a) inappropriate development in the green belt and (b) visual impact on the AONB and landscape. So, at least formally, nothing to do with the topics Cohen raises.
There are probably far better ways of doing the same thing and you have to remember a lot of our Russell group universities are actually global brands with multiple campuses around the world.
My industry contacts in white goods are in the middle of the same price increase negotiations as pretty much everyone else in Food / General Merchandise is or have completed them in December.
There is no way that that EU countries could provide the capacity needed to shut us out of the market in any event.
If we think back to the talk of disaster and grounded planes etc from earlier this year I just have to laugh
Ocado services Morrisons and M&S.
And I can recall Tesco switching from a "pick in shop" model used in the early days to give a rapid startup to central warehouses. Quite some time ago.
3 - Not convinced. AFAICS we are the most developed E-Commerce economy in Europe. Town centres etc will change of course.
Truss really has done a fantastic job this year, following the mess Liam Fox left at the department. This was the last of the agreements waiting wasn't it?
To be fair since Turkey is in the EU Customs Union this will be more of a copy and paste job which is why it couldn't be done before the EU Agreement - but still, its remarkable how little Fox got done and she has gotten it all done in 11 months.
Same as how well Frost has done compared to Robbins. What a difference in outlook compared to this time two years ago when May had survived her No Confidence vote but had no real authority.
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
Interesting play.
The point he compared it to was getting a mortgage, he said you never read the small print, you read the summaries.
Thatcher said, and I paraphrase, you trust the government lawyers and civil service, and they were very competent in delivering the goals of the PM.
"Don't worry, it's not a big college town..."
Don't worry about fishing, it's better than it might have been...
Don't worry about fashion, Milan is bigger anyway...
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
Anything you choose. It is up to you. You have taken back control.
If they want to vote it down they can choose to do so. If they want to vote it through they can choose to do so.
Plus if in January they choose they don't like the deal and want to invoke the 12 month exit clause they can choose to do so.
The MPs have the choice. Not Boris alone. There are 650 elected MPs and barring exceptions like the Speaker not voting the decision is in their hands nobody elses.
"Foreign policy cooperation" should have the square root of f all to do with a trade agreement - don't you agree?
If we want to cooperate in foreign policy we should do so on a case-by-case basis on matter that interest us, like climate change etc - and that should be done globally not just on a continent basis.
Oh ffs, here we go
This sentiment - at the heart of Johnson's GE19 pitch - implies difference AND superiority.
The EU are the Supremes in our mind's eye and we are Diana Ross.
If you bothered to look at my original reply to Alastair I made it explicit that MPs should be given all the time they need to study this treaty before being asked to vote on it. Indeed it is their duty to do so and the Government is wrong to force this through when we could have a provisional acceptance as the EU Parliament is providing.
Do they just wear trackies round your way?
Using a launch via Arianespace. The launcher is actual Russian - Arianespace made a deal with the Russians to use Soyuz as a the low cost launcher in their portfolio.
The restart of launches means revenue for Arianespace - and a few sighs of relief. Their launch portfolio was starting to look quite thin.
Oh, and OneWeb satellite construction is moving to the UK. From the US.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!