politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What should the losers do next on 24 June?

HurstLlama said:

I detect a very strange mood on here this morning, almost as if those posters who would prefer to remain in the EU are conceding that they have lost the argument. It is most odd, entirely premature and I wonder what has brought it about. Surely it can't just be Cameron's appearance on television last night, which, from what I gather, told us nothing new about the man or his reasons for wanting to remain.

@HurstLlama I found a link to the mobile phone service I saw advertised. Not sure it's quite what I thought from the bus-shelter poster but here's the article in the Bath Chronicle;
http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/UK-s-mobile-phone-network-older-customers/story-28892985-detail/story.html

(Good morning all, just popping in with the above link. Hope it works.)

TCPoliticalBetting said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The brass neck of some Kippers is amazing

The event unfolding in front of me should have been enough to send steam shooting out of the ears of any self-respecting UK Independence Party supporter...........

Actually I am more concerned, as would most people be, about the scandal of 1,400 cases of grooming and rape of young girls in the town where the 3 Labour MPs are. You seem more upset with one careless UKIP MEP's legal defence.

Don't be stupid. I never said that.

I know you're in favour of smearing people, as you inaccurately did Lord Cooper and ComRes, but do you think it helps deal with the problem of mass child abuse people by libelling people?

Perhaps you do. I don't.

47% of 18-24 will definitely vote according to BMG poll in Guardian.
80% for 65+

currystar said:

Its the arrogance that gets me within the leave side that all these EU Governement wouldn't dare do anything to upset the UK.

Flip the question around and think about it.

Say if Italy was holding a referendum and voted to leave do you really think that we would set out to harm their or our mutual interests? Of course not. There might be some harsh words, and tough negotiation, but Italy would not become an enemy of the UK, or EU, we would want a deal, they would want a deal, and we would soon enough sort something out.

Both Leave and Remain are engaging in hyperbole, really our membership of the EU is not the greatest issue facing the country.

PlatoSaid said:

currystar said:

You've put a lot of effort into the sarcasm, but what do you think the effects of Brexit will be in other countries?

I really have no idea, but the predictions on here are laughable. EU Governments may all negotiate great trade deals with the UK and our economy may not be affected by leaving the EU. In reality is that likely? I don't understand why people think that EU Governments are going to react in a way that is sensible and beneficial to the UK. Does the history of Europe indicate that this will happen? Following our sticking two fingers up at the rest of Europe (remeber that these Governement are watching what the Leave side are currently saying) I would imagine that they will make life as difficult as possible for the UK and do everything they can to show that the UK was wrong to leave, to ensure that no other Country wants to leave in the future.

I think the first area that will suffer will be the aircraft industry. Within 5 years of a leave vote I dont think Airbus will make its wings in the UK anymore.

Its the arrogance that gets me within the leave side that all these EU Governement wouldn't dare do anything to upset the UK.

Do you think in retrospect that it was wise for Cameron to lead Remain?

Judging from last night's debate and voxpops elsewhere, he's made this personal and turned into a vote on himself and his HMG - not on the merits or otherwise of Remain.

As ever Cameron has acted in an entirely honorable manner. Despite Farage claiming last night that he never believes a word that Cameron says, he has held this referendum just as he said he would (in the same way he held the Scottish referendum) despite him knowing that it would be damaging to his Government and the Conservative Party. Because of the lack of an alternative "face" for the remain campaign due to both the lack of a big hitter within his party and the frankly astonishing lack of engagement by the Labour Party, he has sacrificed himself. As he is a huge eurosceptic this must be very difficult for him but he has sacrificed himself for the cause and has earnt huge respect from me for this. It would be better for both the Remain campaign and for Cameron personally if there was an alternative, but there isn't.

Despite the bile on here Cameron will go down in history as a great Prime Minister. These are days that will be fondly remembered in the future.

glw said:

currystar said:

Its the arrogance that gets me within the leave side that all these EU Governement wouldn't dare do anything to upset the UK.

Flip the question around and think about it.

Say if Italy was holding a referendum and voted to leave do you really think that we would set out to harm their or our mutual interests? Of course not. There might be some harsh words, and tough negotiation, but Italy would not become an enemy of the UK, or EU, we would want a deal, they would want a deal, and we would soon enough sort something out.

Both Leave and Remain are engaging in hyperbole, really our membership of the EU is not the greatest issue facing the country.

Quite so. The UK will be reasonable and generous.

We will have to work constructively with our European partners to agree a deal that works for all.

Scott_P said:

If Airbus close the Bristol factory, can Nige explain to the workers how they can cash their Sovereignty cheques?

Airbus is likely to move more manufacturing from the UK come what may. Leaving the EU would make some difference, but those jobs are only marginally safer if we remain.

rottenborough said:

47% of 18-24 will definitely vote according to BMG poll in Guardian.
80% for 65+

On that basis I suggest that the 40% turnout level would be a struggle for 18-24 year olds since there are :-
1. Are they registered where they live on GE day?
2. The young have good intentions to vote and then fall short.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

rottenborough said:

47% of 18-24 will definitely vote according to BMG poll in Guardian.
80% for 65+

On that basis I suggest that the 40% turnout level would be a struggle for 18-24 year olds since there are :-
1. Are they registered where they live on GE day?
2. The young have good intentions to vote and then fall short.

General election turnout was 58% for 18 to 25s. Given a slightly lower turnout overall for the referendum, 47% isn't unreasonable.

One more thought: What do UKIP do with themselves if Leave wins and the Tory right takes over the government? They're on the up, they're not just going to go home and tidy their gardens. I think they have to try to work the voters up into a state of righteous indignation at the traitorous sell-out that the Gove/Boris/Patel government is trying to shaft the voters with. Ironically, it's going to be hard to keep the *right* together, even as mainstream establishment Tories feel estranged from their party.

So you've got Corbyn cuddled up on the left fighting with the Greens, the Tories way off to the right and yet still splitting that vote with UKIP, and a humungous gaping void in the centre where most of the voters are, occupied solely by the rotting corpse of the Liberal Democrats.

glw said:

currystar said:

Its the arrogance that gets me within the leave side that all these EU Governement wouldn't dare do anything to upset the UK.

Flip the question around and think about it.

Say if Italy was holding a referendum and voted to leave do you really think that we would set out to harm their or our mutual interests? Of course not. There might be some harsh words, and tough negotiation, but Italy would not become an enemy of the UK, or EU, we would want a deal, they would want a deal, and we would soon enough sort something out.

Both Leave and Remain are engaging in hyperbole, really our membership of the EU is not the greatest issue facing the country.

The UK has never been particulary engaged with the European project. Most other EU countries are and are very passionate about it. Politicians and leaders can be very odd. Europes post and current history demonstrates this. They are not sensible and we cannot predict what they will do. Its not hyperbole to say that British Citizens cannot predict what foreign governments are going to do.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

rottenborough said:

47% of 18-24 will definitely vote according to BMG poll in Guardian.
80% for 65+

On that basis I suggest that the 40% turnout level would be a struggle for 18-24 year olds since there are :-
1. Are they registered where they live on GE day?
2. The young have good intentions to vote and then fall short.

General election turnout was 58% for 18 to 25s. Given a slightly lower turnout overall for the referendum, 47% isn't unreasonable.

A reasonable view. The question does arise, from our knowledgeable PB community what was the intention of the 18-24/25s just prior to the GE? Also the GE happened AFAIK when students were at uni whilst this referendum happens when most have gone elsewhere.

HurstLlama said:

I detect a very strange mood on here this morning, almost as if those posters who would prefer to remain in the EU are conceding that they have lost the argument. It is most odd, entirely premature and I wonder what has brought it about. Surely it can't just be Cameron's appearance on television last night, which, from what I gather, told us nothing new about the man or his reasons for wanting to remain.

No, not lost the argument, but the cause is lost. In a month's time Britain will no longer be a member of the European Union. I said from the outset that Leave had the easier sell, and so it has proved. Nevertheless, there will be fun to be had. I can't wait to see Boris, IDS and Farage - skull-and-crossbones hats, cutlasses between their teeth - sailing off to forge this swashbuckling New Britain. Meanwhile, every redundancy, every bankruptcy, every diminishment of Britain's standing will be wholly and incontrovertibly Leave's fault. I'm looking forward to it.

A commentator here made the point that the gross contribution is the right figure to use as remainers quote gross returns from the EU. And the world food prices are, I think, lower than EU prices. And though a British government might want to subsidise home farmers they won't need to subsidise set aside as we don't have a glut of home grown milk or wheat. And we won't have to subsidise tobacco farming - https://euobserver.com/economic/27142 - or wine lakes. And we won't be seeing VAT harmonisation adding VAT to food. I don't think Gove will have any trouble on the economics.

Speaking of tobacco, a friend has tried home growing tobacco. He said that you could legally grow a certain amount for your own use, but drying was the problem. I am thinking a cannabis grower's kit might be a solution?

AlastairMeeks said:

@Casino_Royale Do you think it would reasonable and generous to impose a points system for migration and then be outraged when countries affected suggest that they might do the same in return?

Candidly, I believe that Leavers are being utterly delusional about how the renegotiation would be carried out. They seem to believe that they can get everything they want pain-free without making any concessions on points of concern on the other side and that it will all be tickety boo in a week or two once it's blown over because that would be "better". To me that sounds barking mad.

I'd have no problem with countries doing the same in return.

I think it's entirely reasonable.

currystar said:

They are not sensible and we cannot predict what they will do. Its not hyperbole to say that British Citizens cannot predict what foreign governments are going to do.

Of course we can't predict what they will do, but given the lopsided trade between the UK and our European pals its quite unlikely that they would want to cause serious harm to it.

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

glw said:

currystar said:

Its the arrogance that gets me within the leave side that all these EU Governement wouldn't dare do anything to upset the UK.

Flip the question around and think about it.

Say if Italy was holding a referendum and voted to leave do you really think that we would set out to harm their or our mutual interests? Of course not. There might be some harsh words, and tough negotiation, but Italy would not become an enemy of the UK, or EU, we would want a deal, they would want a deal, and we would soon enough sort something out.

Both Leave and Remain are engaging in hyperbole, really our membership of the EU is not the greatest issue facing the country.

Quite so. The UK will be reasonable and generous.

We will have to work constructively with our European partners to agree a deal that works for all.

The UK would do what is best for the UK. You would not expect otherwise. Clearly, the Italians will decide what is best for Italy in the Brexit negotiations.

Yes, but my point was that the UK would not be vindictive to Italy if she chose to Leave the EU.

Charles said:

asjohnstone said:

The day after a leave vote, no matter how narrow, there are no "remainers" only former remainers who will quickly adapt to the new reality. In 1910 there was a strong unionist party in southern ireland, by 1920 it didn't exist.

They have no cause, there will be no "let's get back in" groupings, for leavers post defeat, it's in there mind, it's just another step on the long march to eventual victory

You need to be careful about that parallel.

Our family were unionists in Southern Ireland. We were extremely well thought of in the region by both the Ascendancy and the locals.

750 years of good faith and goodwill bought us 48 hours notice of when they were planning to burn our house down. Most people didn't get any.

And you are surprised that there was no unionist party in southern ireland by 1920?

Perhaps not the best parallel, apologies for any offence. The point remains, for remainers, once defeated, there is never any way back and they cease to be. For Leavers, the holy war goes on forever.

Leavers simply care about the issue more.

rottenborough said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

rottenborough said:

47% of 18-24 will definitely vote according to BMG poll in Guardian.
80% for 65+

On that basis I suggest that the 40% turnout level would be a struggle for 18-24 year olds since there are :-
1. Are they registered where they live on GE day?
2. The young have good intentions to vote and then fall short.

Yep, I would take the 'definitely' with a huge pinch of salt. Glasto and all that.

I can't recall whether someone had crunched the numbers to see what turn-out is needed amongst the pro-Remain (mainly) young in order to deliver an overall Remain vote. But I suspect 40% isn't it.

Going back to my anecdote on last night's EU event in my patch. It was packed out (300+) but very very few young people.

There may well be a particularly strong class skew with young AB's voting and young CDE's not, so partially compensating for the age skew.

Casino_Royale said:

Stark_Dawning said:

HurstLlama said:

I detect a very strange mood on here this morning, almost as if those posters who would prefer to remain in the EU are conceding that they have lost the argument. It is most odd, entirely premature and I wonder what has brought it about. Surely it can't just be Cameron's appearance on television last night, which, from what I gather, told us nothing new about the man or his reasons for wanting to remain.

No, not lost the argument, but the cause is lost. In a month's time Britain will no longer be a member of the European Union. I said from the outset that Leave had the easier sell, and so it has proved. Nevertheless, there will be fun to be had. I can't wait to see Boris, IDS and Farage - skull-and-crossbones hats, cutlasses between their teeth - sailing off to forge this swashbuckling New Britain. Meanwhile, every redundancy, every bankruptcy, every diminishment of Britain's standing will be wholly and incontrovertibly Leave's fault. I'm looking forward to it.

You certainly will lose the argument if you carry on like that.

Old Golden Dawning ain't a happy bunny.

PlatoSaid said:

Re Article 50 Tom Harris.

"Islam was hugely effective, quizzing the Prime Minister as he has rarely been quizzed before. And you could tell that he was struggling to answer when he found himself threatening (promising?) to trigger the exit process the week after a Leave vote, even before exit negotiations started. Why? Please tell us, Prime Minister."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/02/how-did-david-cameron-cope-with-the-sky-news-audience-and-faisal/

This threat from Cameron is why he may be gone the next day if LEAVE win.

Scott_P said:

PlatoSaid said:

trigger the exit process the week after a Leave vote, even before exit negotiations started. Why? Please tell us, Prime Minister."

Because that's the order it happens in. You ask for exit, then negotiate the exit...

The starting point for negotiations is a key decision point and that advantage is in the Govt's hands. Since there is a two year maximum for the period after it is triggered, Vote LEAVE say that the best tactic is not to trigger it until we are ready to negotiate. Now may be you know more about international negotiations than them? Perhaps you could enlighten us with what your experience is?

chestnut said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

rottenborough said:

47% of 18-24 will definitely vote according to BMG poll in Guardian.
80% for 65+

On that basis I suggest that the 40% turnout level would be a struggle for 18-24 year olds since there are :-
1. Are they registered where they live on GE day?
2. The young have good intentions to vote and then fall short.

General election turnout was 58% for 18 to 25s. Given a slightly lower turnout overall for the referendum, 47% isn't unreasonable.

What's the source document for 58%?

http://news.sky.com/story/1479819/six-out-of-10-young-voters-turn-out-for-election

I do note turnout compared to YouGov's certainty to vote measure was somewhat lower, though.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

You seem unaware of negotiating strategies and what Vote LEAVE have said.

You seem unaware of the "will of the British people"

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Scott_P said:

PlatoSaid said:

trigger the exit process the week after a Leave vote, even before exit negotiations started. Why? Please tell us, Prime Minister."

Because that's the order it happens in. You ask for exit, then negotiate the exit...

The starting point for negotiations is a key decision point and that advantage is in the Govt's hands. Since there is a two year maximum for the period after it is triggered, Vote LEAVE say that the best tactic is not to trigger it until we are ready to negotiate. Now may be you know more about international negotiations than them? Perhaps you could enlighten us with what your experience is?

I have 25 years of negotiating international contracts. Given the piss-poor way the Renegotiation was handled, it would not remotely surprise me that Cameron took the worst possible route on Article 50.

foxinsoxuk said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

glw said:

currystar said:

Its the arrogance that gets me within the leave side that all these EU Governement wouldn't dare do anything to upset the UK.

Flip the question around and think about it.

Say if Italy was holding a referendum and voted to leave do you really think that we would set out to harm their or our mutual interests? Of course not. There might be some harsh words, and tough negotiation, but Italy would not become an enemy of the UK, or EU, we would want a deal, they would want a deal, and we would soon enough sort something out.

Both Leave and Remain are engaging in hyperbole, really our membership of the EU is not the greatest issue facing the country.

Quite so. The UK will be reasonable and generous.

We will have to work constructively with our European partners to agree a deal that works for all.

The UK would do what is best for the UK. You would not expect otherwise. Clearly, the Italians will decide what is best for Italy in the Brexit negotiations.

Yes, but my point was that the UK would not be vindictive to Italy if she chose to Leave the EU.

One man's vindictive is another man's reasonable. Each member state will make its own assessment of its best interests and will act accordingly. No-one is owed any favours. Electorate sentiment will also play a big part. We'll just have to hope that Boris and Nigel are right.

I think that Frankfurt and Paris will be looking for a deal that gives them a preferential position , once they can disregard London when writing the rules.

Absolutely. Brexit is a great opportunity for both to build themselves as financial centres. No passporting for the City. How many Tory MPs will vote through a Brexit deal that fails to protect the Square Mile and Canary Wharf?

Morning all. Another good article from Alastair, as we would all expect.

Clearly, in the event of a Leave result, the priority of all MPs should be to implement the wishes of voters as fully as possible - which unambiguously means withdrawing from the EU/EEA freedom of movement obligations - whilst doing their best to minimise the economic damage. I think pretty much everyone is underestimating just what a gigantic task that is going to be, not only politically but also in terms of simple administrative measures and sorting out the legal mess. The lawyers will certainly do well from the chaos, probably no one else will.

On the specific point of when (assuming a Leave result) the government should pull the Article 50 lever, I think there is a very strong argument indeed for pulling it as soon as possible. I know that Andrew Lillico and others have argued persuasively that we should delay doing so, but I think they have missed the crucial point. That is that the economic damage and political chaos, caused by the uncertainty, doesn't start when Article 50 is invoked, it would start at the precise moment when the announcement of a Leave result is made. From that moment EU-dependent inward investment will be on hold, business will wait to see what happens, consumers will draw their horns in, and financial markets will be ultra-cautious (sterling falling and a 'flight to safety' in asset allocation). The damaging uncertainty will only come to an end when the new PM and the EU apparatchikship are photographed shaking hands after a no doubt gruelling final session of negotiations on the new UK/EU relationship. Therefore, prolonging things by delaying the invocation Article 50 will just make things worse; we would need to get this done as soon as possible.

You might be thinking 'Ah yes, but we wouldn't necessarily lose any time because we could carry our preliminary talks before invoking Article 50'. But I believe the scope for that is very limited; serious negotiations will be difficult when the formal process has not started. It's in everyone's interest to get the thing sorted as soon as possible. If we've pulled the trigger on June 24th, then there's no reason to delay. The Conservative parliamentary party will just have to find some way of getting a new team in place ASAP.

Alanbrooke said:

Casino_Royale said:

Stark_Dawning said:

HurstLlama said:

I detect a very strange mood on here this morning, almost as if those posters who would prefer to remain in the EU are conceding that they have lost the argument. It is most odd, entirely premature and I wonder what has brought it about. Surely it can't just be Cameron's appearance on television last night, which, from what I gather, told us nothing new about the man or his reasons for wanting to remain.

No, not lost the argument, but the cause is lost. In a month's time Britain will no longer be a member of the European Union. I said from the outset that Leave had the easier sell, and so it has proved. Nevertheless, there will be fun to be had. I can't wait to see Boris, IDS and Farage - skull-and-crossbones hats, cutlasses between their teeth - sailing off to forge this swashbuckling New Britain. Meanwhile, every redundancy, every bankruptcy, every diminishment of Britain's standing will be wholly and incontrovertibly Leave's fault. I'm looking forward to it.

You certainly will lose the argument if you carry on like that.

Old Golden Dawning ain't a happy bunny.

No, I'm in a good place. Britain's membership of the European Union is about to be rescinded. There's nothing I can do about it, so why worry? I also think that's Britain is finished too. Sturgeon and SNP will pounce post-Brexit, claiming that the SindyRef was run on a false prospectus. They'll get another one and they'll probably win it. All this just so the hard-right Tories can give Cameron and Osborne a poke in the eye. Was it really worth it?

As I leaver, I actually think remain has had a good 48 hours.

Watching the PM get his ar$e kicked might be enough for some of the softer leavers. And Corbyn's latest comments suggests he rather welcomes the uncertainty Brexit might bring.

He has reminded us that Corbyn, more than anybody, would be happy to see the back of Dave.

chestnut said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

rottenborough said:

47% of 18-24 will definitely vote according to BMG poll in Guardian.
80% for 65+

On that basis I suggest that the 40% turnout level would be a struggle for 18-24 year olds since there are :-
1. Are they registered where they live on GE day?
2. The young have good intentions to vote and then fall short.

General election turnout was 58% for 18 to 25s. Given a slightly lower turnout overall for the referendum, 47% isn't unreasonable.

What's the source document for 58%?

Good question, the turnout at GE15 was 66.4% but the turnout for polling stations was 63.5%. Therefore a "turnout was 58% for 18 to 25s" looks dubious.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Morning all. Another good article from Alastair, as we would all expect.

Clearly, in the event of a Leave result, the priority of all MPs should be to implement the wishes of voters as fully as possible - which unambiguously means withdrawing from the EU/EEA freedom of movement obligations - whilst doing their best to minimise the economic damage. I think pretty much everyone is underestimating just what a gigantic task that is going to be, not only politically but also in terms of simple administrative measures and sorting out the legal mess. The lawyers will certainly do well from the chaos, probably no one else will.

On the specific point of when (assuming a Leave result) the government should pull the Article 50 lever, I think there is a very strong argument indeed for pulling it as soon as possible. I know that Andrew Lillico and others have argued persuasively that we should delay doing so, but I think they have missed the crucial point. That is that the economic damage and political chaos, caused by the uncertainty, doesn't start when Article 50 is invoked, it would start at the precise moment when the announcement of a Leave result is made. From that moment EU-dependent inward investment will be on hold, business will wait to see what happens, consumers will draw their horns in, and financial markets will be ultra-cautious (sterling falling and a 'flight to safety' in asset allocation). The damaging uncertainty will only come to an end when the new PM and the EU apparatchikship are photographed shaking hands after a no doubt gruelling final session of negotiations on the new UK/EU relationship. Therefore, prolonging things by delaying the invocation Article 50 will just make things worse; we would need to get this done as soon as possible.

You might be thinking 'Ah yes, but we wouldn't necessarily lose any time because we could carry our preliminary talks before invoking Article 50'. But I believe the scope for that is very limited; serious negotiations will be difficult when the formal process has not started. It's in everyone's interest to get the thing sorted as soon as possible. If we've pulled the trigger on June 24th, then there's no reason to delay. The Conservative parliamentary party will just have to find some way of getting a new team in place ASAP.

It's OK, the EU will give us all we want. There'll be no problems.

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

SouthamObserver said:

Casino_Royale said:

glw said:

currystar said:

Its the arrogance that gets me within the leave side that all these EU Governement wouldn't dare do anything to upset the UK.

Flip the question around and think about it.

Say if Italy was holding a referendum and voted to leave do you really think that we would set out to harm their or our mutual interests? Of course not. There might be some harsh words, and tough negotiation, but Italy would not become an enemy of the UK, or EU, we would want a deal, they would want a deal, and we would soon enough sort something out.

Both Leave and Remain are engaging in hyperbole, really our membership of the EU is not the greatest issue facing the country.

Quite so. The UK will be reasonable and generous.

We will have to work constructively with our European partners to agree a deal that works for all.

The UK would do what is best for the UK. You would not expect otherwise. Clearly, the Italians will decide what is best for Italy in the Brexit negotiations.

Yes, but my point was that the UK would not be vindictive to Italy if she chose to Leave the EU.

One man's vindictive is another man's reasonable. Each member state will make its own assessment of its best interests and will act accordingly. No-one is owed any favours. Electorate sentiment will also play a big part. We'll just have to hope that Boris and Nigel are right.

Funnily enough I expect electoral sentiment in EU countries to be a good deal more measured than that of the politicians.

Look, it will be no cakewalk. But there are rational interests and emotional interests.

I think the former will win out. I don't think the UK would cut off its nose to spite its face if Italy left the EU, but the EU doesn't matter as much to us. That is true. But I think after a lot of huffing and puffing real politik would win out. It always does. And the pressure on the EU from the US and others in the G7/G8 to see sense would be huge.

The broader point is this: what possible good message does it send to the peoples of Europe about the desirability of the EU and the European project if it actively tries to punish those who democratically vote against it in a free and fair referendum.

They might easily find that the peoples of Europe react just as badly to threats and bullying as we do.

Richard_Nabavi said:

You might be thinking 'Ah yes, but we wouldn't necessarily lose any time because we could carry our preliminary talks before invoking Article 50'. But I believe the scope for that is very limited; serious negotiations will be difficult when the formal process has not started.

I think you could make that claim a bit more strongly where the EU is concerned: Contentious EU decisions only ever happen at the last possible moment, under threat of crisis.

Stark_Dawning said:

Charles said:

Stark_Dawning said:

every redundancy, every bankruptcy, every diminishment of Britain's standing ... I'm looking forward to it.

What a nice man you must be

You caused it my friend. You'll have to deal with it.

?!?

If Leave wins, that will be a bad thing (in my view) and, if there is an economic hit, that will be a bad thing too. We can't rejoice in the flagellation of the country.

MarqueeMark said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Scott_P said:

PlatoSaid said:

trigger the exit process the week after a Leave vote, even before exit negotiations started. Why? Please tell us, Prime Minister."

Because that's the order it happens in. You ask for exit, then negotiate the exit...

The starting point for negotiations is a key decision point and that advantage is in the Govt's hands. Since there is a two year maximum for the period after it is triggered, Vote LEAVE say that the best tactic is not to trigger it until we are ready to negotiate. Now may be you know more about international negotiations than them? Perhaps you could enlighten us with what your experience is?

I have 25 years of negotiating international contracts. Given the piss-poor way the Renegotiation was handled, it would not remotely surprise me that Cameron took the worst possible route on Article 50.

I defer to you sir. Mine was just 6 years followed by 10 years working overseas. Cameron's negotiating process failed the moment he virtually ruled out leaving, as it told the other side he wanted to accept whatever they offered him.
"I really only want to buy this car from you as it will make my dreams come true, now what is the price"?

Stark_Dawning said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Morning all. Another good article from Alastair, as we would all expect.

Clearly, in the event of a Leave result, the priority of all MPs should be to implement the wishes of voters as fully as possible - which unambiguously means withdrawing from the EU/EEA freedom of movement obligations - whilst doing their best to minimise the economic damage. I think pretty much everyone is underestimating just what a gigantic task that is going to be, not only politically but also in terms of simple administrative measures and sorting out the legal mess. The lawyers will certainly do well from the chaos, probably no one else will.

On the specific point of when (assuming a Leave result) the government should pull the Article 50 lever, I think there is a very strong argument indeed for pulling it as soon as possible. I know that Andrew Lillico and others have argued persuasively that we should delay doing so, but I think they have missed the crucial point. That is that the economic damage and political chaos, caused by the uncertainty, doesn't start when Article 50 is invoked, it would start at the precise moment when the announcement of a Leave result is made. From that moment EU-dependent inward investment will be on hold, business will wait to see what happens, consumers will draw their horns in, and financial markets will be ultra-cautious (sterling falling and a 'flight to safety' in asset allocation). The damaging uncertainty will only come to an end when the new PM and the EU apparatchikship are photographed shaking hands after a no doubt gruelling final session of negotiations on the new UK/EU relationship. Therefore, prolonging things by delaying the invocation Article 50 will just make things worse; we would need to get this done as soon as possible.

You might be thinking 'Ah yes, but we wouldn't necessarily lose any time because we could carry our preliminary talks before invoking Article 50'. But I believe the scope for that is very limited; serious negotiations will be difficult when the formal process has not started. It's in everyone's interest to get the thing sorted as soon as possible. If we've pulled the trigger on June 24th, then there's no reason to delay. The Conservative parliamentary party will just have to find some way of getting a new team in place ASAP.

Dave will invoke Article 50 that afternoon, and will probably do so with relish. Dave's enemies want a Leave victory to render him a shrunken and broken man. He knows this and won't give them that satisfaction. Dave will have a ball.

Doesn't there have to be some kind of delay whilst it becomes clear that there will be no legal challenge to the Ref result?

Roger said:

AlastairMeeks said:

@Casino_Royale Do you think it would reasonable and generous to impose a points system for migration and then be outraged when countries affected suggest that they might do the same in return?

Candidly, I believe that Leavers are being utterly delusional about how the renegotiation would be carried out. They seem to believe that they can get everything they want pain-free without making any concessions on points of concern on the other side and that it will all be tickety boo in a week or two once it's blown over because that would be "better". To me that sounds barking mad.

They have a delusional idea of the esteem the UK is held in by the rest of Europe. It is respected as are many of the countries in the EU but not more than.

I'm starting to get the very uneasy feeling that this referendum is being decided by the old the very old and the Colonel Blimps and few of them will be around to face the lasting consequences.

God, you're rude.

Do you not know I'm married to an Eastern European (also planning to vote Leave as of last night, by the way) and that I went to an international school? That I'm in my 30s? That I'm a senior professional and strategy consultant? That I've had a life long love of the Swiss/Austrian Alps, Scandanavia and am fascinated by the politics of Eastern Europe and developing genuine liberal democracy on the continent? That I speak regularly to my wife's family and know precisely the challenges faced in Eastern Europe and what they think of the U.K.?

You projecting your very narrow prejudices and bigotry onto Leave voters isn't going to win you one single vote.

Please. Keep it up.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Morning all. Another good article from Alastair, as we would all expect.

Clearly, in the event of a Leave result, the priority of all MPs should be to implement the wishes of voters as fully as possible - which unambiguously means withdrawing from the EU/EEA freedom of movement obligations - whilst doing their best to minimise the economic damage. I think pretty much everyone is underestimating just what a gigantic task that is going to be, not only politically but also in terms of simple administrative measures and sorting out the legal mess. The lawyers will certainly do well from the chaos, probably no one else will.

On the specific point of when (assuming a Leave result) the government should pull the Article 50 lever, I think there is a very strong argument indeed for pulling it as soon as possible. I know that Andrew Lillico and others have argued persuasively that we should delay doing so, but I think they have missed the crucial point. That is that the economic damage and political chaos, caused by the uncertainty, doesn't start when Article 50 is invoked, it would start at the precise moment when the announcement of a Leave result is made. From that moment EU-dependent inward investment will be on hold, business will wait to see what happens, consumers will draw their horns in, and financial markets will be ultra-cautious (sterling falling and a 'flight to safety' in asset allocation). The damaging uncertainty will only come to an end when the new PM and the EU apparatchikship are photographed shaking hands after a no doubt gruelling final session of negotiations on the new UK/EU relationship. Therefore, prolonging things by delaying the invocation Article 50 will just make things worse; we would need to get this done as soon as possible.

You might be thinking 'Ah yes, but we wouldn't necessarily lose any time because we could carry our preliminary talks before invoking Article 50'. But I believe the scope for that is very limited; serious negotiations will be difficult when the formal process has not started. It's in everyone's interest to get the thing sorted as soon as possible. If we've pulled the trigger on June 24th, then there's no reason to delay. The Conservative parliamentary party will just have to find some way of getting a new team in place ASAP.

What a daft post!
There will be no issues. Investment will flood in. EU Governments will be in a queue to negotiate a trade deal which is beneficial to the UK. The buoyant economy we have now will get a lot stronger. I can't wait.

foxinsoxuk said:

Patrick said:

glw said:

Scott_P said:

If Airbus close the Bristol factory, can Nige explain to the workers how they can cash their Sovereignty cheques?

Airbus is likely to move more manufacturing from the UK come what may. Leaving the EU would make some difference, but those jobs are only marginally safer if we remain.

Erm...the really complicated bits of a passenger jet are the engines, the wings and the cockpit/avionics/software. The engines and wings are made in Derby and Bristol respectively. (Engines by Rolls Royce as sub-contractor). Where would airbus suddenly move wing production to? A Leave decision would make zero difference to Airbus production from a business / technical point of view. The EU would be insane to add tariff cost to Airbus when a completed wing is flown to Toulouse from Bristol. It's a bullshit argument of the variety that Nick Clegg used to peddle. UK Airbus jobs are secure in or out of the EU.

Rolls Royce have plants in Berlin and Slovakia. Derby may well wither on the vine for investment.

It never has been sensible to build wings in one country then ship them elsewhere to assemble, better to build near the final production line.

The wings are either flown from Broughton (North Wales) or shipped via Mostyn Docks (North Wales) to Toulouse. There can be no certainty that Airbus will not shift manufacture of the wings to France, Germany or Spain if we exit the EU

Jonathan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Punishing is an emotional, subjective word. The member states will make decisions on what is in their best interests. That may involve insisting on terms that are not to the UK's advantage. If you and other Leavers are right that we hold more cards than The member states, everything will turn out OK. If you are wrong, it won't and a lot of people in the UK will pay the price. That's why I really hope you're right, despite the strong doubts I have that you are. We shall see.

Clearly it's not in the interest of the EU to provide other members incentives to leave. If we leave, we should prepare to be out in the cold.

If the EU can only hold itself together by threatening democratic votes against it and punishing "deserters" then, in the long run, it is doomed.

Anyone who hopes things go pear-shaped after a Brexit vote is a cock, quite frankly. Millions of livelihoods are at stake here. If Boris, Nigel and co have called this wrong it won't be the wealthy and the retired (in the UK) who pay the price, it will be average punters and their families.

Reflecting on Mr Meeks thread header I guess the leavers all claim it is not over the fight goes on. ( it shouldn't but no doubt it will) The Remainers will say it's binding for ever ever ever...so there.

I am wondering if Chilcott has been specifically timed to take people's minds of it for the next 3 years.

Roger said:

I'm beginning to think we should Leave. We owe it to our cultured cousins in the EU to spare them having to put up with us any longer than they have to.

Just reading half a dozen posters on this site tells you what kind of neigbours the poor buggers have been having to live with.

Why don't you apply for French Citizenship and renounce your UK citizenship then? If you despise the good people of Britain as you lefties always do, then bugger off,

Jonathan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Punishing is an emotional, subjective word. The member states will make decisions on what is in their best interests. That may involve insisting on terms that are not to the UK's advantage. If you and other Leavers are right that we hold more cards than The member states, everything will turn out OK. If you are wrong, it won't and a lot of people in the UK will pay the price. That's why I really hope you're right, despite the strong doubts I have that you are. We shall see.

Clearly it's not in the interest of the EU to provide other members incentives to leave. If we leave, we should prepare to be out in the cold.

Your statement should be repeated over and over by Remain