politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New ComRes phone poll has REMAIN retaining its 7% lead
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New ComRes phone poll has REMAIN retaining its 7% lead
Almost one of the constants of this campaign has been that the Inners are doing a fair bit better with phone polls than online and so the pattern continues tonight.
Comments
-
Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.0
-
Which type of polling got closest to the AV result?0
-
Phone polling. The ICM phone poll was spot onTCPoliticalBetting said:Which type of polling got closest to the AV result?
0 -
4th, like Arsenal.
OK 5th like ManU then...0 -
Blue on blue attacks start. Inevitable sadly.
Faisal Islam ✔ @faisalislam
In response to Osborne, @vote_leave have put out @johnredwood to say PM "not to be trusted" given pro-ERM HMT role
11:12 PM - 17 Apr 20160 -
Thanks, was it Yougov online for the Scots referendum then?TheScreamingEagles said:
Phone polling. The ICM phone poll was spot onTCPoliticalBetting said:Which type of polling got closest to the AV result?
0 -
An increase in DKs? Meaning the campaigns so far have actually had some effect, as people who thought they were certain now not being sure. Well, it's more an effect than I expected this early on.
Good night.
Start? What was IDS calling Cameron and Osborne liars (by inference at least)?TCPoliticalBetting said:Blue on blue attacks start. Inevitable sadly.
Faisal Islam ✔ @faisalislam
In response to Osborne, @vote_leave have put out @johnredwood to say PM "not to be trusted" given pro-ERM HMT role
11:12 PM - 17 Apr 20160 -
I think it was tie between a few pollsters, all modes.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Thanks, was it Yougov online for the Scots referendum then?TheScreamingEagles said:
Phone polling. The ICM phone poll was spot onTCPoliticalBetting said:Which type of polling got closest to the AV result?
0 -
Start of responses to Osborne's dead cat. Oh look. Yes but that cat is not dead and let us look at what you poison things with...kle4 said:
Start? What was IDS calling Cameron and Osborne liars (by inference at least)?TCPoliticalBetting said:Blue on blue attacks start. Inevitable sadly.
Faisal Islam ✔ @faisalislam
In response to Osborne, @vote_leave have put out @johnredwood to say PM "not to be trusted" given pro-ERM HMT role
11:12 PM - 17 Apr 2016
0 -
Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?0 -
Just heard that the Treasury are issuing gas masks with a warning that the supply of oxygen will be cut a massive 56% if we vote for Brexit.0
-
You need to have a word with Scott P, he says that the government will ignore what the Leave side say during the campaign after June 24th if they win.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?0 -
Who knows? Perhaps the PM was behind the line about the Pound becoming like the Ukrainian Karbovanets after ERM exit.TCPoliticalBetting said:Blue on blue attacks start. Inevitable sadly.
Faisal Islam ✔ @faisalislam
In response to Osborne, @vote_leave have put out @johnredwood to say PM "not to be trusted" given pro-ERM HMT role
11:12 PM - 17 Apr 20160 -
@Sunil_Prasannan
FPT
"Darth Eagles", that is priceless, Cap'n Doc, just superb. I shall use it henceforth.
The art of great satire is to pick out the essential the truth and, by the cringe, you did it with that piece. Also I love the idea of the "Daft side of the Force" - superb, simply superb.
Best wishes to your Mum now that the growing season is upon us, hope she is gearing up for this year's competition.
Avast, Belike, Else.0 -
Believe the LSE has compiled a similar report - awkward for leave if truerunnymede said:
Who knows? Perhaps the PM was behind the line about the Pound becoming like the Ukrainian Karbovanets after ERM exit.TCPoliticalBetting said:Blue on blue attacks start. Inevitable sadly.
Faisal Islam ✔ @faisalislam
In response to Osborne, @vote_leave have put out @johnredwood to say PM "not to be trusted" given pro-ERM HMT role
11:12 PM - 17 Apr 20160 -
Comedy Results?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
0 -
Well they were the most accurate* pollster at the general election.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Comedy Results?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
*Well the least inaccurate pollster
And on that bombshell, goodnight0 -
Given indyref was a 10% margin for No, a 7% lead for Remain shows plenty still to play for0
-
Well if you look at the Sterling exchange rate before we entered the EEC it was considerably higher than it is now - in 1970 it was about $2.60 if memory serves.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe the LSE has compiled a similar report - awkward for leave if truerunnymede said:
Who knows? Perhaps the PM was behind the line about the Pound becoming like the Ukrainian Karbovanets after ERM exit.TCPoliticalBetting said:Blue on blue attacks start. Inevitable sadly.
Faisal Islam ✔ @faisalislam
In response to Osborne, @vote_leave have put out @johnredwood to say PM "not to be trusted" given pro-ERM HMT role
11:12 PM - 17 Apr 2016
Obviously the long term decline in the value of Sterling is not all, or even very much, connected with the EEC/EC/EU. Why should leaving the EU present a greater risk in the medium to long term?
This crap that Cameron and Co are putting out really is starting to get on my nerves. Osborne is, in my household at least, becoming a hate figure. If he was competent enough to deliver on what he said he would that might give him some space but he has failed on his own terms and so has zero credibility. When Herself, a lifelong Conservative voter through and through, changes channels whenever Cameron or Osborne is on TV and actually starts swearing when reading the of their pronouncements in the Telegraph, then I start to think Cameron and his clique have a problem.0 -
Thank you for the nice words, Mr Llama!HurstLlama said:@Sunil_Prasannan
FPT
"Darth Eagles", that is priceless, Cap'n Doc, just superb. I shall use it henceforth.
The art of great satire is to pick out the essential the truth and, by the cringe, you did it with that piece. Also I love the idea of the "Daft side of the Force" - superb, simply superb.
Best wishes to your Mum now that the growing season is upon us, hope she is gearing up for this year's competition.
Avast, Belike, Else.
May need to belay entering this year's gardening compy, as we're soon to be having a new kitchen done, with associated building stuff likely "adorning" our front, but hopefully it will be done by the late summer.0 -
It's not like we've recently had a referendum lost because of doubts over economic questions........Richard_Nabavi said:But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
0 -
Well, I suppose they've been too busy fighting the Carswell/Farage ego wars.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
The leave campaign does have a pretty good point though, doesn't it, that the future of the EU is equally uncertain? the very modus operandi of EU decisions on all major matters being to kick the can down the road, look the other way and whistle.
0 -
O/T:
"Mary Beard: Allowing students 'safe spaces' is 'fundamentally dishonest'"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/17/mary-beard-allowing-students-safe-spaces-is-fundamentally-dishon/0 -
Almost there
0 -
The Conservative Party is a fragile coalition. Fractures are inevitable when it comes under pressure.TCPoliticalBetting said:Blue on blue attacks start. Inevitable sadly.
Faisal Islam ✔ @faisalislam
In response to Osborne, @vote_leave have put out @johnredwood to say PM "not to be trusted" given pro-ERM HMT role
11:12 PM - 17 Apr 20160 -
Carswell is unique in many ways. But the admirable one is that despite being alone, he has effectively sustained a backbench rebellion !dugarbandier said:
Well, I suppose they've been too busy fighting the Carswell/Farage ego wars.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
The leave campaign does have a pretty good point though, doesn't it, that the future of the EU is equally uncertain? the very modus operandi of EU decisions on all major matters being to kick the can down the road, look the other way and whistle.0 -
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
0 -
Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.0
-
It says an awful lot about Cameron's standing if ministers are openly criticising him. They clearly believe he'll be gone soon.SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
0 -
Yep, or they will be. It's hard to see how you can row back from being a minister who associates with press releases saying the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.blackburn63 said:
It says an awful lot about Cameron's standing if ministers are openly criticising him. They clearly believe he'll be gone soon.SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
0 -
What's difficult about this election is that the online polls are all clustered around one outcome, and the phone polls around another. The very high proportion of don't knows is also an issue.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Thanks, was it Yougov online for the Scots referendum then?TheScreamingEagles said:
Phone polling. The ICM phone poll was spot onTCPoliticalBetting said:Which type of polling got closest to the AV result?
To get optimistic, I'd like to see Leave regularly getting numbers in the 41-43% range. We are not there yet.0 -
Quite. Some on here (not me) were predicting armageddon for the conservative party over the referendum, they were correct. Heaven knows what the govt will look like in 6 months regardless of the outcome.SouthamObserver said:
Yep, or they will be. It's hard to see how you can row back from being a minister who associates with press releases saying the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.blackburn63 said:
It says an awful lot about Cameron's standing if ministers are openly criticising him. They clearly believe he'll be gone soon.SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
The PM and Chancellor have made a total bollox of things, instead of running the country they're obsessed with terrifying people into prolonging their stagnating careers.0 -
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
0 -
-
Yep, from the very start this has been about keeping Dave and George in charge. They were frightened of the Tory right and UKIP so promised a vote they never wanted to get them past the last GE. And now they are paying the price. Their only option is to fight fire with fire. We'll see what and who is left standing once the flames have been doused. But they are going to carry on burning long after 23rd June.blackburn63 said:
Quite. Some on here (not me) were predicting armageddon for the conservative party over the referendum, they were correct. Heaven knows what the govt will look like in 6 months regardless of the outcome.SouthamObserver said:
Yep, or they will be. It's hard to see how you can row back from being a minister who associates with press releases saying the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.blackburn63 said:
It says an awful lot about Cameron's standing if ministers are openly criticising him. They clearly believe he'll be gone soon.SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
The PM and Chancellor have made a total bollox of things, instead of running the country they're obsessed with terrifying people into prolonging their stagnating careers.
0 -
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
0 -
I've not seen the Treasury Report in detail. Are they saying the economy would be 6% smaller than it is today, in the event of Brexit? Or are they saying it would be 6% smaller than would otherwise be the case, but still substantially greater than today? If the latter, what growth rates are they projecting? If, for example, their central forecast is for 2.5% economic growth, then what they'd actually be predicting is that GDP will be c.30% greater than today, in the event of Brexit, as opposed to 36% higher, in the event of Remain.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?0 -
Agree entirely, look how Cameron is viewed on here compared with last May, Osborne is ridiculed. Chances are they'll "win" the referendum but it will be a pyrrhic victory, they're both scarred irrevocably.SouthamObserver said:
Yep, from the very start this has been about keeping Dave and George in charge. They were frightened of the Tory right and UKIP so promised a vote they never wanted to get them past the last GE. And now they are paying the price. Their only option is to fight fire with fire. We'll see what and who is left standing once the flames have been doused. But they are going to carry on burning long after 23rd June.blackburn63 said:
Quite. Some on here (not me) were predicting armageddon for the conservative party over the referendum, they were correct. Heaven knows what the govt will look like in 6 months regardless of the outcome.SouthamObserver said:
Yep, or they will be. It's hard to see how you can row back from being a minister who associates with press releases saying the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.blackburn63 said:
It says an awful lot about Cameron's standing if ministers are openly criticising him. They clearly believe he'll be gone soon.SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
The PM and Chancellor have made a total bollox of things, instead of running the country they're obsessed with terrifying people into prolonging their stagnating careers.0 -
I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.0
-
I presumed that's why they'd got Redwood to say it......maintain the possibility of post referendum reconciliation, while leaving the dirtier stuff to has beens/never was much elder statesmen.....SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
0 -
I think memories of the ERM run quite deep on the Right. A lot of natural Conservatives were hit hard in 1990-92.SouthamObserver said:I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.
0 -
If that were the case they would be recommending Leave.SouthamObserver said:
Yep, from the very start this has been about keeping Dave and George in charge.blackburn63 said:
Quite. Some on here (not me) were predicting armageddon for the conservative party over the referendum, they were correct. Heaven knows what the govt will look like in 6 months regardless of the outcome.SouthamObserver said:
Yep, or they will be. It's hard to see how you can row back from being a minister who associates with press releases saying the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.blackburn63 said:
It says an awful lot about Cameron's standing if ministers are openly criticising him. They clearly believe he'll be gone soon.SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
The PM and Chancellor have made a total bollox of things, instead of running the country they're obsessed with terrifying people into prolonging their stagnating careers.0 -
It could be that, or I might be concerned about the life consuming effects of partyline cantfoxinsoxuk said:
0 -
Reading the posts from Remainers on here they are comfortable that the EU is nothing more than a protection racket, we pay them £billions a year, if we stop they threaten us with tariffs.
Take the £1.7bn that Cameron handed over despite guaranteeing he wouldn't, we know where it comes from - UK taxpayers, but where on earth does it go?
Nobody has a clue, it is a travesty and Cameron is a traitor, stealing our money and giving it away.0 -
Sean_F said:
I think memories of the ERM run quite deep on the Right. A lot of natural Conservatives were hit hard in 1990-92.SouthamObserver said:I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.
It will certainly play to the older (already LEAVE) demographic - a 40 year old in 1990 is now 66 - while no one under their mid-thirties will have the remotest idea what its about...
0 -
This is not true.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
A plan has been developed: http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal0 -
Sky has expanded because it has a good product, but also because of the extension of the single market into service industries, something that the UK has been pushing for since the days of Maggie. Potentially the EU is an enormous market.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
0 -
Of course its not true, truth went out of the window ages ago. Desperate people resort to desperate measures, in the week before the vote heaven knows what Osborne will be clinging to.Casino_Royale said:
This is not true.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
A plan has been developed: http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal0 -
We end the supremacy of EU law and the European Court. We will be able to kick out those who make our laws.Casino_Royale said:
This is not true.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
A plan has been developed: http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal
Which 'European Court'?
Deliberately ambiguous?
Or are we going to withdraw from the EHCR (which we drafted) too?0 -
They are hoping people hear it as "I will be personally £4,300 worse off next year if I vote to Leave".Sean_F said:
I've not seen the Treasury Report in detail. Are they saying the economy would be 6% smaller than it is today, in the event of Brexit? Or are they saying it would be 6% smaller than would otherwise be the case, but still substantially greater than today? If the latter, what growth rates are they projecting? If, for example, their central forecast is for 2.5% economic growth, then what they'd actually be predicting is that GDP will be c.30% greater than today, in the event of Brexit, as opposed to 36% higher, in the event of Remain.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
But this is black magic, as we all know. I think GDP in the event of Brexit is just as likely to be higher by 2030.0 -
Is it? I've always found it to be full of hype and self-congratulation. Meanwhile, its programmes are distinctly variable in quality, except for its cricket commentary which is uniformly dismal.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
What is undoubtedly very good is its business model - a mix of advertising and subscription- which gives it a financial clout other broadcasters can only dream of. That coupled to its political links has always made it virtually unassailable.0 -
A lot of them were already pretty fed up by then, the late Mr Indigo (Snr), a engineer from a military family, as Tory as they come, stopped voting Conservative over Chancellor John Major's pronoucement that " The harsh truth is that if the policy isn’t hurting, it isn’t working." as he watched his mortage rate hit 15%, and infact never forgave that for the rest of his life.Sean_F said:
I think memories of the ERM run quite deep on the Right. A lot of natural Conservatives were hit hard in 1990-92.SouthamObserver said:I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.
0 -
Stick to putting plasters on cuts.foxinsoxuk said:
Sky has expanded because it has a good product, but also because of the extension of the single market into service industries, something that the UK has been pushing for since the days of Maggie. Potentially the EU is an enormous market.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
People buy things because they are good, it has zero to do with the EU or any other bureaucracy, plenty of countries thrive outside of it, so would we. Juncker etc have never made or sold a thing in their lives, they need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want from who they want, they have absolutely no right to interfere with business transactions.0 -
We spend our money on our priorities. Instead of sending £350 million per week to Brussels, we will spend it on our priorities like the NHS and schools.
Reality Check verdict: Leaving the EU would not give the UK an extra £350m a week to spend on the NHS.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-360400600 -
They have millions of happy customers.ydoethur said:
Is it? I've always found it to be full of hype and self-congratulation. Meanwhile, its programmes are distinctly variable in quality, except for its cricket commentary which is uniformly dismal.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
What is undoubtedly very good is its business model - a mix of advertising and subscription- which gives it a financial clout other broadcasters can only dream of. That coupled to its political links has always made it virtually unassailable.
You cannot, ever. beat the market.0 -
Leave should not be fighting its corner from the Tory right. It's niche, quite voter repellant and is already convinced we should quit the EU and guaranteed to vote accordingly.Sean_F said:
I think memories of the ERM run quite deep on the Right. A lot of natural Conservatives were hit hard in 1990-92.SouthamObserver said:I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.
0 -
We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests.
Which other mechanism is provided for in EU Treaties?0 -
Personally I think it's an excellent idea. John Redwood's toenail clippings have more economic nouse than George Osborne.SouthamObserver said:I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.
0 -
Apparently it's 200 pages long, an incentive not to read it I presume.Sean_F said:
I've not seen the Treasury Report in detail. Are they saying the economy would be 6% smaller than it is today, in the event of Brexit? Or are they saying it would be 6% smaller than would otherwise be the case, but still substantially greater than today? If the latter, what growth rates are they projecting? If, for example, their central forecast is for 2.5% economic growth, then what they'd actually be predicting is that GDP will be c.30% greater than today, in the event of Brexit, as opposed to 36% higher, in the event of Remain.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?0 -
We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
But not many people do actually buy Sky. It has 12 million subscribers out of around 80 million potential customers.blackburn63 said:
People buy things because they are good, it has zero to do with the EU or any other bureaucracy
That does not of course mean that more people do not watch it given the number of pubs/clubs etc who buy it, but it doesn't necessarily suggest people buy it because it's good. Indeed, it's hard not to imagine thatMaoistmost (oops!) people get it because it's now the only place you can watch most sports live, however ineptly they are presented. That again is a good business model not a good product.0 -
Any journalist worth his or her salt is going to want to know whether Gove, Grayling, Boris etc agree that the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.CarlottaVance said:
I presumed that's why they'd got Redwood to say it......maintain the possibility of post referendum reconciliation, while leaving the dirtier stuff to has beens/never was much elder statesmen.....SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
And if we can't trust the judgement of those who advocated the UK's membership of the ERM, clearly we must take the words of Lord Lawson, Lord Lamont and the late Lady Thatcher with a pinch of salt too.
0 -
It is very possible though for the market to be regulated, and it is an example of why it is in Britains interest to be helping write the rules in the single market, rather than outside. This applies whether you like Sky, or dislike them. Personally I think that they are far too close to our senior politicians.blackburn63 said:
They have millions of happy customers.ydoethur said:
Is it? I've always found it to be full of hype and self-congratulation. Meanwhile, its programmes are distinctly variable in quality, except for its cricket commentary which is uniformly dismal.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
What is undoubtedly very good is its business model - a mix of advertising and subscription- which gives it a financial clout other broadcasters can only dream of. That coupled to its political links has always made it virtually unassailable.
You cannot, ever. beat the market.0 -
They have millions of customers, although still just 1 in 7 of their full market: I imagine cost puts a ceiling on how many they can have in practice.blackburn63 said:
They have millions of happy customers.ydoethur said:
Is it? I've always found it to be full of hype and self-congratulation. Meanwhile, its programmes are distinctly variable in quality, except for its cricket commentary which is uniformly dismal.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
What is undoubtedly very good is its business model - a mix of advertising and subscription- which gives it a financial clout other broadcasters can only dream of. That coupled to its political links has always made it virtually unassailable.
You cannot, ever. beat the market.
Where is the evidence they are happy? Don't quote Sky's own sources, they're not trustworthy.0 -
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
No, it's not. Brexit is about negotiating a new deal. That will be as binding as the current one.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
0 -
Well quite, Sky's successful because it's a strong premium product offering and customers willing to pay money for it. And the diversity of offers keeps it in the lower range too with NowTv, for instance.blackburn63 said:
They have millions of happy customers.ydoethur said:
Is it? I've always found it to be full of hype and self-congratulation. Meanwhile, its programmes are distinctly variable in quality, except for its cricket commentary which is uniformly dismal.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
What is undoubtedly very good is its business model - a mix of advertising and subscription- which gives it a financial clout other broadcasters can only dream of. That coupled to its political links has always made it virtually unassailable.
You cannot, ever. beat the market.0 -
Why are you rising to Tesco value trolling? He's obviously enjoying himself; let him get on with it.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
Not at all. If we moved to EFTA that would give far more freedom to the electorate to decide their future. If we were completely out we could have an ala carte future shaped by the government of the day in according with the wishes of the voters, I think some countries call it democracy, I understand it's quite popular.SouthamObserver said:
No, it's not. Brexit is about negotiating a new deal. That will be as binding as the current one.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
Which part of 'negotiation' didn't you understand?Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
As with SINDYRef (is that a trigger word?) LEAVE are promising a lot of stuff not within their gift.
Now if you think Britain's 64 million are going to get everything they want from rEU's 444 million and their 27 governments, may I have some of what you're on?0 -
Take Control is an awful slogan.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
We would be bound by the terms of whatever new deal is negotiated. If we moved to EFTA, for example, we would be obliged to guarantee free movement of people. We could not just vote in a general election to end it any more than we can now.Indigo said:
Not at all. If we moved to EFTA that would give far more freedom to the electorate to decide their future. If we were completely out we could have an ala carte future shaped by the government of the day in according with the wishes of the voters, I think some countries call it democracy, I understand it's quite popular.SouthamObserver said:
No, it's not. Brexit is about negotiating a new deal. That will be as binding as the current one.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
0 -
This might come as a shock to you but NONE of it is in their gift, as we have mentioned rather a lot on here, so I am surprised you haven't noticed. Leave have no power to deliver anything, that is up to the government of the day. Leave is pressure group looking to obtain a divorce, so that the democratically elected government can start looking for a new girlfriend, staying on speaking terms with the ex would be an advantage.CarlottaVance said:
Which part of 'negotiation' didn't you understand?Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
As with SINDYRef (is that a trigger word?) LEAVE are promising a lot of stuff not within their gift.
Now if you think Britain's 64 million are going to get everything they want from rEU's 444 million and their 27 governments, may I have some of what you're on?0 -
Well we could but it would involve leaving EFTA. This of course would be less of a step than leaving the EU and it is quite possible that a major party (UKIP being the obvious one) might argue for it. If the UK then voted for it that is what we would do.SouthamObserver said:
We would be bound by the terms of whatever new deal is negotiated. If we moved to EFTA, for example, we would be obliged to guarantee free movement of people. We could not just vote in a general election to end it any more than we can now.Indigo said:
Not at all. If we moved to EFTA that would give far more freedom to the electorate to decide their future. If we were completely out we could have an ala carte future shaped by the government of the day in according with the wishes of the voters, I think some countries call it democracy, I understand it's quite popular.SouthamObserver said:
No, it's not. Brexit is about negotiating a new deal. That will be as binding as the current one.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
But Sky is also subject to regulation. Take football - it is not able to own the rights to all foitball games shown in Europe. If it did, it would have a monopoly and, therefore, the ability to charge whatever it could get away with, to the detriment of those who could not afford to pay. Anti-trust laws are vital to any capitalist system. Europe's are powerful and globally influential.Plato_Says said:Well quite, Sky's successful because it's a strong premium product offering and customers willing to pay money for it. And the diversity of offers keeps it in the lower range too with NowTv, for instance.
blackburn63 said:
They have millions of happy customers.ydoethur said:
Is it? I've always found it to be full of hype and self-congratulation. Meanwhile, its programmes are distinctly variable in quality, except for its cricket commentary which is uniformly dismal.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
What is undoubtedly very good is its business model - a mix of advertising and subscription- which gives it a financial clout other broadcasters can only dream of. That coupled to its political links has always made it virtually unassailable.
You cannot, ever. beat the market.
0 -
Yes, I know, I just got bored, I think he is probably doing the other shift from Scott_P, time to click the "ignore" button.Luckyguy1983 said:
Why are you rising to Tesco value trolling? He's obviously enjoying himself; let him get on with it.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
If we have Jezza & team in charge of Lab it is fitting for John Redwood to opine for the the Leave Cons.Luckyguy1983 said:
Personally I think it's an excellent idea. John Redwood's toenail clippings have more economic nouse than George Osborne.SouthamObserver said:I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.
Both, equally bonkers and repellent in their own way.0 -
And a pain in the neck. I now pay for Sky and a small sum (since I switched internet provider) to BT as well. Thanks EU, that bit of regulation really helped the consumer. Not.SouthamObserver said:
But Sky is also subject to regulation. Take football - it is not able to own the rights to all foitball games shown in Europe. If it did, it would have a monopoly and, therefore, the ability to charge whatever it could get away with, to the detriment of those who could not afford to pay. Anti-trust laws are vital to any capitalist system. Europe's are powerful and globally influential.Plato_Says said:Well quite, Sky's successful because it's a strong premium product offering and customers willing to pay money for it. And the diversity of offers keeps it in the lower range too with NowTv, for instance.
blackburn63 said:
They have millions of happy customers.ydoethur said:
Is it? I've always found it to be full of hype and self-congratulation. Meanwhile, its programmes are distinctly variable in quality, except for its cricket commentary which is uniformly dismal.blackburn63 said:
Sky has expanded because its product is good, it is shameful that people want to be part of a bureaucracy that has the power to stifle trade. Politicians need to get out of the way and let people buy and sell what they want.foxinsoxuk said:
The Murdoch papers do like to be on the winning side, but on the other hand have always been rather anti-EU. The expansion of Sky into the EU over the last few years has created a bit more of a dilemma for them. It is a market that they want to expand into further, and one where non-tariff bariers in terms of media ownership can scupper the plans. Indeed it is an example of the single marrker in action. It is important for Sky to have friendly people writing the rules.surbiton said:
The Sun always wants to be on the winning side. Will The Sunil on Sunday do the same ?TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting that The Sun are no longer using an online pollster for their EURef polling, but have moved to a phone pollster.
What is undoubtedly very good is its business model - a mix of advertising and subscription- which gives it a financial clout other broadcasters can only dream of. That coupled to its political links has always made it virtually unassailable.
You cannot, ever. beat the market.0 -
And we could vote in a GE to leave the EU with no need for a referendum. All of which shows that the British people retain sovereignty and the right to decide the country's future.DavidL said:
Well we could but it would involve leaving EFTA. This of course would be less of a step than leaving the EU and it is quite possible that a major party (UKIP being the obvious one) might argue for it. If the UK then voted for it that is what we would do.SouthamObserver said:
We would be bound by the terms of whatever new deal is negotiated. If we moved to EFTA, for example, we would be obliged to guarantee free movement of people. We could not just vote in a general election to end it any more than we can now.Indigo said:
Not at all. If we moved to EFTA that would give far more freedom to the electorate to decide their future. If we were completely out we could have an ala carte future shaped by the government of the day in according with the wishes of the voters, I think some countries call it democracy, I understand it's quite popular.SouthamObserver said:
No, it's not. Brexit is about negotiating a new deal. That will be as binding as the current one.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
0 -
And so much for a reconciliation reshuffle including any of those jokers. Gove perhaps, but Boris has put all on Red and expects, presumably, either to be PM or back on the backbenches (if he decides not to resign), come 2020.SouthamObserver said:
Any journalist worth his or her salt is going to want to know whether Gove, Grayling, Boris etc agree that the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.CarlottaVance said:
I presumed that's why they'd got Redwood to say it......maintain the possibility of post referendum reconciliation, while leaving the dirtier stuff to has beens/never was much elder statesmen.....SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
And if we can't trust the judgement of those who advocated the UK's membership of the ERM, clearly we must take the words of Lord Lawson, Lord Lamont and the late Lady Thatcher with a pinch of salt too.0 -
Yes - that's how the NATS won too - just keep talking among yourselves......Indigo said:
Yes, I know, I just got bored, I think he is probably doing the other shift from Scott_P, time to click the "ignore" button.Luckyguy1983 said:
Why are you rising to Tesco value trolling? He's obviously enjoying himself; let him get on with it.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
If you're on social media, Leave has roughly twice the footprint of Remain
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ff96bc10-04d8-11e6-9d17-169208febe580 -
The Worldwide Global Conspiracy has snared the FT as well...
@ChrisGiles_: My initial analysis of Treasury Brexit numbers (Spoiler: thay are both large and credible) https://t.co/2G0tZnRyuh via @FT
Meanwhile Project Whinge roll out John Redwood. Yup, that'll do it.0 -
But...but...but - we are told LEAVE have a plan....riddled with holes, inconsistencies, contradictions and wishful thinking.....and you expect the government to follow that if LEAVE win?Indigo said:
This might come as a shock to you but NONE of it is in their gift, as we have mentioned rather a lot on here, so I am surprised you haven't noticed. Leave have no power to deliver anything, that is up to the government of the day. Leave is pressure group looking to obtain a divorce, so that the democratically elected government can start looking for a new girlfriend, staying on speaking terms with the ex would be an advantage.CarlottaVance said:
Which part of 'negotiation' didn't you understand?Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
As with SINDYRef (is that a trigger word?) LEAVE are promising a lot of stuff not within their gift.
Now if you think Britain's 64 million are going to get everything they want from rEU's 444 million and their 27 governments, may I have some of what you're on?0 -
Sean - it is the latter. But the posited numbers are extreme nevertheless.SouthamObserver said:
Any journalist worth his or her salt is going to want to know whether Gove, Grayling, Boris etc agree that the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.CarlottaVance said:
I presumed that's why they'd got Redwood to say it......maintain the possibility of post referendum reconciliation, while leaving the dirtier stuff to has beens/never was much elder statesmen.....SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
And if we can't trust the judgement of those who advocated the UK's membership of the ERM, clearly we must take the words of Lord Lawson, Lord Lamont and the late Lady Thatcher with a pinch of salt too.Sean_F said:
I've not seen the Treasury Report in detail. Are they saying the economy would be 6% smaller than it is today, in the event of Brexit? Or are they saying it would be 6% smaller than would otherwise be the case, but still substantially greater than today? If the latter, what growth rates are they projecting? If, for example, their central forecast is for 2.5% economic growth, then what they'd actually be predicting is that GDP will be c.30% greater than today, in the event of Brexit, as opposed to 36% higher, in the event of Remain.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
Put it this way - the Treasury is claiming that leaving the EU will lead a permanent drop in UK GDP which is about the same as the short-term impact of the global financial crisis of 2008-09, and is somewhat larger than most estimates of the long-term impact of that crisis.
I doubt anyone involved in this report really believes these numbers.
0 -
Its Sindyref all over again.Plato_Says said:If you're on social media, Leave has roughly twice the footprint of Remain
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ff96bc10-04d8-11e6-9d17-169208febe58
I wonder if Wings over UK is based in Slovakia....0 -
I am not sure Boris knows quite what he is doing. Gove clearly has principles for which he would be prepared to sacrifice his career.TOPPING said:
And so much for a reconciliation reshuffle including any of those jokers. Gove perhaps, but Boris has put all on Red and expects, presumably, either to be PM or back on the backbenches (if he decides not to resign), come 2020.SouthamObserver said:
Any journalist worth his or her salt is going to want to know whether Gove, Grayling, Boris etc agree that the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.CarlottaVance said:
I presumed that's why they'd got Redwood to say it......maintain the possibility of post referendum reconciliation, while leaving the dirtier stuff to has beens/never was much elder statesmen.....SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
And if we can't trust the judgement of those who advocated the UK's membership of the ERM, clearly we must take the words of Lord Lawson, Lord Lamont and the late Lady Thatcher with a pinch of salt too.
0 -
Not really. Whilst we remain in the EU we have the entire smorgasboard of the EU take it or leave it. This ties the hands of the government of any member state no matter what people vote for as Greece demonstrated all too vividly last year.SouthamObserver said:
And we could vote in a GE to leave the EU with no need for a referendum. All of which shows that the British people retain sovereignty and the right to decide the country's future.DavidL said:
Well we could but it would involve leaving EFTA. This of course would be less of a step than leaving the EU and it is quite possible that a major party (UKIP being the obvious one) might argue for it. If the UK then voted for it that is what we would do.SouthamObserver said:
We would be bound by the terms of whatever new deal is negotiated. If we moved to EFTA, for example, we would be obliged to guarantee free movement of people. We could not just vote in a general election to end it any more than we can now.Indigo said:
Not at all. If we moved to EFTA that would give far more freedom to the electorate to decide their future. If we were completely out we could have an ala carte future shaped by the government of the day in according with the wishes of the voters, I think some countries call it democracy, I understand it's quite popular.SouthamObserver said:
No, it's not. Brexit is about negotiating a new deal. That will be as binding as the current one.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
Once we are out a more nuanced approach will be more straightforward, albeit still a matter of negotiation and agreement.0 -
I haven't reviewed the Treasury workings.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
But do you really think that it is *plausible* that every family will be £4,300 worse off* as the Beeb is reporting? It seems well out of line with what everyone else is saying and, in my view, overeggs what they need to do and risks credibility
* I believe this is by 2030.0 -
Although mortgage rates were there before the ERM too. When John Major announced the UK was joining the ERM in 1990, it was announced concurrent with a cut in interest rates.Indigo said:
A lot of them were already pretty fed up by then, the late Mr Indigo (Snr), a engineer from a military family, as Tory as they come, stopped voting Conservative over Chancellor John Major's pronoucement that " The harsh truth is that if the policy isn’t hurting, it isn’t working." as he watched his mortage rate hit 15%, and infact never forgave that for the rest of his life.Sean_F said:
I think memories of the ERM run quite deep on the Right. A lot of natural Conservatives were hit hard in 1990-92.SouthamObserver said:I mean, who on earth could have thought that giving John Redwood the first response on the Chancellor's claims was a good idea? And referring to the ERM, for God's sake! Isn't Norman Lamont on the Leave side? Not that anyone normal actually remembers the ERM crisis and what caused it, of course.
The fact is that Nigel Lawson's policy of shadowing the Deutschemark in the late 1980s led to monetary policy that was far too loose. This meant that inflation accelerated, reaching about 11% in late summer 1990. To respond to sharply rising inflation, interest rates rose, and this hammered the UK economy at the same time that the world economy was already slipping into a nasty recession.
The ERM did not cause Britain's early 1990s recession: that was the result of a late 1980s boom, too much consumer debt, a slowdown in the world economy, and runaway inflation.
It did, however, make it harder for the government to respond, and the fact that interest rates in the summer of 1992 were sent through the roof at a time when inflation was largely vanquished is a testament to the fact that exchange rate pegs very rarely work.0 -
I expect Gove is very disappointed in what his closest political friends are saying.SouthamObserver said:
Any journalist worth his or her salt is going to want to know whether Gove, Grayling, Boris etc agree that the PM and CoE cannot be trusted.CarlottaVance said:
I presumed that's why they'd got Redwood to say it......maintain the possibility of post referendum reconciliation, while leaving the dirtier stuff to has beens/never was much elder statesmen.....SouthamObserver said:Blimey - do Boris, Gove, Grayling et al really believe Cameron cannot be trusted on the economy? They are going to get plenty of questions about that, I imagine.
And if we can't trust the judgement of those who advocated the UK's membership of the ERM, clearly we must take the words of Lord Lawson, Lord Lamont and the late Lady Thatcher with a pinch of salt too.0 -
Personally, I think it's rather good.Luckyguy1983 said:
Take Control is an awful slogan.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
-
Just like Switzerland:DavidL said:
Not really. Whilst we remain in the EU we have the entire smorgasboard of the EU take it or leave it. This ties the hands of the government of any member state no matter what people vote for as Greece demonstrated all too vividly last year.SouthamObserver said:
And we could vote in a GE to leave the EU with no need for a referendum. All of which shows that the British people retain sovereignty and the right to decide the country's future.DavidL said:
Well we could but it would involve leaving EFTA. This of course would be less of a step than leaving the EU and it is quite possible that a major party (UKIP being the obvious one) might argue for it. If the UK then voted for it that is what we would do.SouthamObserver said:
We would be bound by the terms of whatever new deal is negotiated. If we moved to EFTA, for example, we would be obliged to guarantee free movement of people. We could not just vote in a general election to end it any more than we can now.Indigo said:
Not at all. If we moved to EFTA that would give far more freedom to the electorate to decide their future. If we were completely out we could have an ala carte future shaped by the government of the day in according with the wishes of the voters, I think some countries call it democracy, I understand it's quite popular.SouthamObserver said:
No, it's not. Brexit is about negotiating a new deal. That will be as binding as the current one.Indigo said:
Which bit of it being up to the electorate didn't you understand ? Leaving is about giving back power to the British voters to decide how they want their country run, including issues like whether they want the Four Freedoms or not, the clue is in the campaign slogan "Take Control".CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....
Once we are out a more nuanced approach will be more straightforward, albeit still a matter of negotiation and agreement.
http://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/swiss-told-to-vote-again-on-free-movement-except-this-time-the-stakes-are-higher/
0 -
All forecasts require margins of error so insanely wide as to make the predictions largely pointless.Charles said:
I haven't reviewed the Treasury workings.Richard_Nabavi said:Dear me, the Leave side are rattled, reduced to answering every single point by trying to shoot the messenger.
From one point of view, it's not surprising they are rattled. The daily drip-drip of Project Doubt (which is what it is, not 'Project Fear') is bound to have a cumulative effect. It will of course continue every day until June 23rd.
But what on earth did they expect? Has it really come as a complete surprise to them that the utter failure to prepare an alternative plan, or put in place some at least vaguely plausible answers to the doubts, might be a problem?
But do you really think that it is *plausible* that every family will be £4,300 worse off* as the Beeb is reporting? It seems well out of line with what everyone else is saying and, in my view, overeggs what they need to do and risks credibility
* I believe this is by 2030.
Could we all be 4k worse off? Yes.
Could we all be 4k bettwe off? Yes.
Is there any way to test? No.
Short of sawing the country in half, and allowing half of it to remain in the EU, and half to leave, all these are forecasts are untestable and should be ignored. (Perhaps we should saw it in three thirds: EU, EFTA/EEA, and CO.)0 -
I think it's pretty clear from your posts on here that you're more interested in pushing attack lines than genuinely exploring the boundaries of any new deal.CarlottaVance said:We take back control of migration policy, including the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, so we have a fairer and more humane policy, and we decide who comes into our country, on what terms, and who is removed.
Four Freedoms?
Yes or No?
We've already been told we can't have 'Three out of Four' Freedoms.....0 -
Like crowds in Trafalgar Sq... HMT play Goal Seek with Excel, whilst
Oxford Economics assessment suggested Brexit would shrink the economy by up to 3.9 per cent
National Institute of Economic and Social Research forecast a decline of 2.25 per cent
PWC put it at 3.5 per cent.0 -
All very Corbynista too.foxinsoxuk said:
Its Sindyref all over again.Plato_Says said:If you're on social media, Leave has roughly twice the footprint of Remain
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ff96bc10-04d8-11e6-9d17-169208febe58
I wonder if Wings over UK is based in Slovakia....
0
