Wow. We forget how much Brexit will destabiise the EU, even as it impacts us.
A despairing REMAIANIAC Tory friend of mine, last night, told me that the iUK's best hope was for the EU to completely fall apart. Or be reduced to a core, so we cannot be bullied so easily.
Simon Danczuk @SimonDanczuk 8m8 minutes ago Have phoned Jeremy & said if required, I'm prepared to serve. I am prepared to make that sacrifice for the Labour Party.
have you seen anything on which way the election in Spain is heading ?
I've been watching the polls like a hawk (obviously), and voting ends in an hour. I don't believe there is an exit poll.
The big change since December's election is that Podemos has merged with the Communists, which puts them on perhaps 25%, against 20% (plus 5% for the Communists last time). The PSOE has likely lost a couple of percent.
So, the likely outcome is:
PP - 29% (unchanged) Podemos - 25% (+5%, all from the Communists having gone) PSOE - 20% (-1%) C - 15% (unchanged)
That basically will give the left wing grouping of PSOE + P more seats than PP + C. However, two things make that fundamentally unstable:
1. They still won't have 50% of the seats, and are likely to be around 10 short. Most of the remainder are Catalan nationalists, many of which are rather right wing.
2. The PSOE isn't going to be the minority partner in a coalition with Podemos, because that would be signing their own death warrant.
So, the likeliest outcome is that the Left wing block and the Right wing one each end up short.
You therefore have one of three possible outcomes:
- PP & C go into a coalition government and PSOE abstains on the confidence vote (probably the most likely outcome) - PP & PSOE do a grand coalition - More elections...
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency if a domino effect occurs
Anymore escalation in racism, and the Americans and French voters might recoil against Trump and Le Pen.
Snipping posts again - nasty habit. More eloquent than usual though, they must surely reward you with your own chair soon?
By the way, I think you missed my question earlier, so here it is again:
If Vote Leave were to provide a prospectus for the next three months actions on the EU and associated issues to Cameron and Osborne, should they follow it?
Simple yes or no - I'm sure you can manage that.
Vote Leave Ltd is a private company with no democratic mandate. Unlike Russia, the UK is not run by companies
Quite. I'd just like to hear if 'You Brexit You Owns it' Scott agrees with you.
The rulings of the ECHR are enforced by the ECJ, so by being in the EU we have to do what the ECHR wants, outside the EU we can chose to ignore it with no real comeback.
No they are not. There was an attempt up until the middle/end of last year to align the ECHR and the ECJ which would have allowed the ECJ to enforce ECHR rulings (basically it involved making the EU a signatory to the EConHR) but it failed.
The ECJ enforces a separate Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Enforcement of ECHR rulings is done by the courts of the individual nations.
The ECJ will eventually subsume the ECHR - it has such a centralising predisposition. Or at least, before Britain left.
That was long the fclaim of some of the Eurosceptics. But I think that ran straight into the buffers at the end of last year.
"Sack Carney! Don't think so, he's the only bloke who's appeared calm."
He may not have been a Leaver, but he'll do the job he's asked.
I have always suspected that the EU will either play hardball (very risky and probably terminal), or come to a compromise after a pretend argument (the logical choice).
The majority of the UK would prefer an old-fashioned common market with more control over our decisions (and this includes immigration). We have the high cards now. We've gone all-in and the EU has to bluff or concede.
They will haggle and offer us a compromise or see all their sixty years of effort go gurgling down the plughole. Dexit, Frexit, Grexit, and Nexit loom.
They will fold.
They may lick their wounds and try for political union later, but they're full of sound and fury at the moment, and it signifies nothing.
I take your point BUT as you also know Boris and Gove were the faces of the Leave Campaign so what they do now is important. They have a responsibility to the country. I hope and imagine they are working with Cameron and Osborne to make sure tomorrow they present as united a front as possible, and give us more details about the future.
Its a much bigger clusterf*ck than that.
Suppose what you (and I) hope is happening, is actually happening, Dave, George, Boris and Mike are sitting somewhere quite beavering away on a plan. They annouce on Monday they they plan to do X, Y and Z and prepared to compromise with the EU on A, B and C in order to get D, E and F.
Then in three months time we get a new PM and new cabinet, who decide that actually they dont like any of what has been proposed.
Again i agree but as much as anything it's a matter of public perception. Something needs to stop the ridiculous levels of hysteria and we can't wait 3 months till we know who the next pm and chancellor are. So step forward Gove and Boris
I agree, but that has to be down to Dave as PM and leader of the party. He has to appoint Gove and Boris to some position that tells everyone that even if he isnt exactly behind them, they are speaking for the future direction of that party and the government (subject to the next PM having a different view). He needs to appoint a transition/negotiation team chaired by Boris with Gove and a few other prominent leavers involved and a few steady remainers on board to provide some ballast.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency now if a domino effect occurs
Podemos want to rip up the Treaty of Lisbon and they are a potential winner of the Spanish election. PP are still most likely to win but the polls have Podemos close enough to win it.
"Win" means under 1/3, right? Presumably they'd need a coalition party, who would establish a maximum crazification threshold.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
Highly probably done by Remainers. We live in the age of the democratisation of the false flag. I've seen members of forums and posters in news threads join under aliases specifically to make 'a side' look awful. Horrid practise. I think I'd feel utterly empty inside if I were to do that. But it happens.
So there's no such thing as a cretinous xenophobe - they're all people in favour of EU membership pretending. You must have lived a seriously sheltered existence.
I'm not denying the existence of the cretinous xenophobe, and I trust you would not deny the existence of astro-turfers, trolls and other associated pond life.
I'm going to put your 'Highly probably done by Remainers' remark down as 'unfortunate' and leave it at that.
He is enamored with calling this the end the death ect ect of Corbyn.
I can't actually understand how he believes all this when Corbyn is standing on such solid ground and his enemies on such flimsy ground.
The battlefield (europe) could not have been more favourable for Corbyn (except foreign policy), especially after the Labour MP's have been proven so out of touch on the issue.
And don't forget the lingering animosity towards the MP's from Labour, the main reason why Corbyn was elected was because the Labour party hates it's own MP's. The view is that the MP's are some kind of out of touch aristocrats who need the chop, and their behaviour proves it.
In what way is Corbyn standing on solid ground? His only 'strength' was his comprehensive victory last year but views might well have changed among members, supporters and unions since then. People have seen him in action and while he may be many things, he ain't a leader.
More pertinently, a leader *has* to command at least the passive support of his or her MPs. Corbyn quite clearly no longer does. It's certainly ironic that after so many issues where Corbyn's been out of touch, the one that the MPs finally revolt over is one where the leader's closer to the voters than they are - but it's also beside the point. The pertinent fact is that they are acting, not why.
Corbyn may or may not survive the day. Quite probably he will, given that no-one can force him out at the moment and he will only go if he chooses to. The next hurdle is Tuesday. If he hasn't resigned by then, he will be no confidenced. Today's resignations are the equivalent of the first vote in the 1990 Tory leadership election. Even loyal MPs will know that Corbyn is so damaged that he can't credibly carry on even if they would have wanted him to (obviously, not all but enough to keep the tide flowing heavily against him). How does he carry on after that? Every interviewer and every other political party will bring it up at every opportunity.
Whether or not the MPs who resigned and those who supported their actions are punished by the CLPs is for another day. The deeds are done and cannot be undone.
They are acting now because the next GE is suddenly potentially much closer.
Very much so, though it's a convenient moment that they *might* have chosen anyway. The sudden increased chance of an Autumn election has no doubt focussed minds and sharpened knives though.
Silly, you could equally do a yellow version. It only required a 1.9% swing to be 50:50 - and Leave won, just.
Yes you could. The BBC produced two maps, a 'degree of Remain' and a 'degree of Leave'. The degree of Leave one is shades of yellow. The colour (it seems to be confusing a lot of people on PB today) is immaterial. Fraser is merely indicating that a more nuanced map is a better way of looking at things than the 'blue vs. yellow' rubbish we've seen parroted on social media, when in actuality, the Highlands was almost bang on 50/50, Moray, Falkirk, Aberdeenshire etc., were all over 40% leave, Northern Ireland was 44% leave, defying all predictions, etc. etc.
'The country I live in voted 2:1 Remain and I just don't want to admit it' alert.
If you're trying to stir up anti-English sentiment, quite useful.
Ah, a quick break from 'absolutely no xenephobic, Brexit-induced racism to see here' to return to that old, comforting favourite, anti-Englishness.
Please don't be cross just because you didn't do your research and have been made to look like an utter chump. Just learn from it.
still defending the scale as being accurate? Still claiming nowhere voted 70+% for Leave?
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency now if a domino effect occurs
Podemos want to rip up the Treaty of Lisbon and they are a potential winner of the Spanish election. PP are still most likely to win but the polls have Podemos close enough to win it.
"Win" means under 1/3, right? Presumably they'd need a coalition party, who would establish a maximum crazification threshold.
In the last polls they were on around 26% with the Main Government party on 29% or so. The problem is that even if they become the largest party they still need allies to form a coalition and the fact they favour independence for Catalonia might also be an issue in putting together such a coalition.
Edit Apologies I see Robert has made exactly the same points.
I know quite a few dutch people who are fed up with the EU. The dutch are a proud trading nation and associating them with Germany is not a wise move. The UK is one of their largest trading partners
"No, when Boomers were in their 20's people in their twenties were one of the richest segments of society. Pensioners were dirt poor. As the Boomers aged so the welath followed them to where we are now. The proportion of wealth between those who are in their twenties and those who are 65+ has almost completely reversed. All through their lives the boomers have been one of the wealthiest segments of society."
Mr. Alistair,
That graph looks at disposable income, does it not?
Then might I suggest you cross-reference it with the growth of occupational pension schemes, particularly the reform introduced by Barbara Castle. Pensioners used to be very poor because they depended on government handouts, then along came defined benefit occupational pensions (i.e. decades of saving) and gradually the pensioners became less poor. Sod all to do with government benefits (though I agree some of those on offer currently are silly). The problem I think comes from a different direction.
As a young man I had a very high disposable income - why shouldn't I? After all I was single and lived in barracks ( a type of opportunity cost) where what I received at the weekly pay parade was my disposable income. When on leave, if I stayed with my mother hse demanded a third of my disposable income as my contribution to the household, I paid up willingly. My son is in much the same situation today, young single, no commitments he can afford to indulge himself, but his mother wants her cut when he is at home.
Of course as we get older we take on commitments, spouses, children, mortgages, etc. and our disposable income drops, sometimes dramatically. In the mid-nineties mine reached a low of £20 per month, out of which we had to fund the needs of a two-year old. However we never stopped saving (12-15% of income plus paying the mortgage). Twenty years later we are debt free and comfortable.
So, my son is, more or less, in the same position I was at his age and Herself and I are considerably better off than my parents generation. So, I am afraid your graph with its talk of rebalancing state benefits cuts no ice at all.
Future generations may not be so lucky but then I am afraid you must blame succesive Chancellor's for fecking up the occupational pensions in search of short term gain.
I agree with SeanT. If BoJo could do what Tsipras failed to do and use the referendum as a gambit to go to Brussels and force a new deal then he could yet emerge as a hero.
But that depends on him finding a way to stop Brexit from happening.
Holy lord. Boris can only save himself by betraying his people. And on whose suffrance does he then hold office?
@PCollinsTimes: No, it's the sore winners that are the problem. They think their inability to fathom what they have done is my fault https://t.co/7GTlcWp44c
Can a pollster please do a survey in Scotland and ask why people voted Remain and whether it was anything to do with supporting the SNP's position or strategy.
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
The Torygraph is giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%.
He is enamored with calling this the end the death ect ect of Corbyn.
I can't actually understand how he believes all this when Corbyn is standing on such solid ground and his enemies on such flimsy ground.
The battlefield (europe) could not have been more favourable for Corbyn (except foreign policy), especially after the Labour MP's have been proven so out of touch on the issue.
And don't forget the lingering animosity towards the MP's from Labour, the main reason why Corbyn was elected was because the Labour party hates it's own MP's. The view is that the MP's are some kind of out of touch aristocrats who need the chop, and their behaviour proves it.
In what way is Corbyn standing on solid ground? His only 'strength' was his comprehensive victory last year but views might well have changed among members, supporters and unions since then. People have seen him in action and while he may be many things, he ain't a leader.
More pertinently, a leader *has* to command at least the passive support of his or her MPs. Corbyn quite clearly no longer does. It's certainly ironic that after so many issues where Corbyn's been out of touch, the one that the MPs finally revolt over is one where the leader's closer to the voters than they are - but it's also beside the point. The pertinent fact is that they are acting, not why.
Corbyn may or may not survive the day. Quite probably he will, given that no-one can force him out at the moment and he will only go if he chooses to. The next hurdle is Tuesday. If he hasn't resigned by then, he will be no confidenced. Today's resignations are the equivalent of the first vote in the 1990 Tory leadership election. Even loyal MPs will know that Corbyn is so damaged that he can't credibly carry on even if they would have wanted him to (obviously, not all but enough to keep the tide flowing heavily against him). How does he carry on after that? Every interviewer and every other political party will bring it up at every opportunity.
Whether or not the MPs who resigned and those who supported their actions are punished by the CLPs is for another day. The deeds are done and cannot be undone.
Why is the Torygraph giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%?
Wow. We forget how much Brexit will destabiise the EU, even as it impacts us.
A despairing REMAIANIAC Tory friend of mine, last night, told me that the iUK's best hope was for the EU to completely fall apart. Or be reduced to a core, so we cannot be bullied so easily.
Looks like it might happen.
Indeed. Our biggest problems with leaving stem from the EU still existing.
We need to sort out our politics and realign it with the values of the nation, and then reach out to other nations who suddenly realise the post-Brexit EU is unsalvageble.
The rulings of the ECHR are enforced by the ECJ, so by being in the EU we have to do what the ECHR wants, outside the EU we can chose to ignore it with no real comeback.
No they are not. There was an attempt up until the middle/end of last year to align the ECHR and the ECJ which would have allowed the ECJ to enforce ECHR rulings (basically it involved making the EU a signatory to the EConHR) but it failed.
The ECJ enforces a separate Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Enforcement of ECHR rulings is done by the courts of the individual nations.
The ECJ will eventually subsume the ECHR - it has such a centralising predisposition. Or at least, before Britain left.
That was long the fclaim of some of the Eurosceptics. But I think that ran straight into the buffers at the end of last year.
It did. The EU attempted to become a signatory of the EHCR, as part of a creeping attempt to take it over. That was struck down by the ECJ last year, in a pretty unambigious ruling.
@PCollinsTimes: No, it's the sore winners that are the problem. They think their inability to fathom what they have done is my fault https://t.co/7GTlcWp44c
I can maybe understand Cameron keeping a low profile, for a couple of days, he must be in shock. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer should be on the TV 24/7, reassuring the markets, offering alternatives, yet zip.
Dereliction of duty.
Sean, I think you are being a bit unrealistic to expect any of the remainers who have suffered the dog's abuse from Brexiters over recent weeks to lift a finger to help them out.
What the country actually needs is Johnson, Gove, Farage etc to be out there trying to reassure people that they have made the right choice - for better or worse that is the future. Unfortunately they haven't a Scooby Doo about what to do next. Don't expect Osborn to save their bacon, it's Brexit's show now
More nonsense, just like you saying no Labour people would vote Leave.
The govt were elected to run the country and that's what they must do, Osborne is sulking, his career is over, he's been well and truly exposed but he is the Chancellor of the Exchequer until he resigns or is sacked. Until then he should do the job he's paid to.
Hold my hand up to being wrong about Labour people voting Leave - it was only 63% and that is why Corbyn is under threat this weekend.
So Osborne should just carry on and do the job he is paid to do - I take it then you would be happy for him to bring forward the budget he proposed during the referendum?.
The rulings of the ECHR are enforced by the ECJ, so by being in the EU we have to do what the ECHR wants, outside the EU we can chose to ignore it with no real comeback.
No they are not. There was an attempt up until the middle/end of last year to align the ECHR and the ECJ which would have allowed the ECJ to enforce ECHR rulings (basically it involved making the EU a signatory to the EConHR) but it failed.
The ECJ enforces a separate Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Enforcement of ECHR rulings is done by the courts of the individual nations.
Baumbast and R v Secretary Of State For The Home Department [2002] ECR "the Court held that when a child has a right of residence in a Member State according to Union law, this also means that his parent(s) should also have a right of residence due to the principle of respect for family life enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights"
I can maybe understand Cameron keeping a low profile, for a couple of days, he must be in shock. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer should be on the TV 24/7, reassuring the markets, offering alternatives, yet zip.
Dereliction of duty.
Sean, I think you are being a bit unrealistic to expect any of the remainers who have suffered the dog's abuse from Brexiters over recent weeks to lift a finger to help them out.
What the country actually needs is Johnson, Gove, Farage etc to be out there trying to reassure people that they have made the right choice - for better or worse that is the future. Unfortunately they haven't a Scooby Doo about what to do next. Don't expect Osborn to save their bacon, it's Brexit's show now
Uh.
THEY'RE NOT THE CHANCELLOR.
They have no basis to be reassuring anybody, because they can't DO ANYTHING.
Do you really think that having 'taken abuse' from Brexiters is some sort of excuse for not doing your job? (Forget helping Brexiters out - the country isn't stupid). Government by tantrum, is this what we're reduced to?
Keep on spouting this bollocks, and every time someone will bat it back as the utter stupidity we all know it to be.
OK, so having told us for weeks that he believes Brexit will be an economic disaster for the UK how exactly do you propose that Osborne now reassures people? Come out and say I was only joking ? Seriously what would you expect him to say that doesn't totally contradict everything he has said over the last couple of months?
I appreciate that technically Johnson et al can't do anything. However what the electorate might just be expecting is for them to be on our TV screens telling us what they want to happen next -with all due respect they don't want to hear from Osborne they want to hear from the people who have set us on this course of action
We have been through this before. World War 2 wasn't exactly a desirable circumstance. The Government still planned. By comparison, this is a picnic - even the doom-laden reports only mention GDP growth of 'a bit less'. Governments a) plan b) if they've been too cocky to think they'll need to plan, come up with one quickly c) Inform the public of their plans to reassure them that whilst they did not wish to be in this situation, they are working efficiently to get the best outcome from difficult circumstances.
This is basic stuff! You're defending the indefensible and you know it. These are the people our country would be in the hands of long term had the public voted IN.
Wow. We forget how much Brexit will destabiise the EU, even as it impacts us.
A despairing REMAIANIAC Tory friend of mine, last night, told me that the iUK's best hope was for the EU to completely fall apart. Or be reduced to a core, so we cannot be bullied so easily.
Looks like it might happen.
Indeed. Our biggest problems with leaving stem from the EU still existsing.
We need to sort out our politics and realign it with the values of the nation, and then reach out to other nations who suddenly realise the post-Brexit EU is unsalvageble.
I bet other people in the EU are looking at the UK now and saying, holy hell I don't want power vacuums and partition. Reports that, for instance, the 5* Movement quietly deleted the section on their website about a euro referendum.
The UK must realise that it has chosen to be a successful country, itself, alone. It is not really on to want everyone else to follow. That's called being a bad neighbour.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
The Greens will, on the back of Brexit, back a second Indy Ref. that's enough for a majority to pass the legislation.
Wow. We forget how much Brexit will destabiise the EU, even as it impacts us.
A despairing REMAIANIAC Tory friend of mine, last night, told me that the iUK's best hope was for the EU to completely fall apart. Or be reduced to a core, so we cannot be bullied so easily.
Looks like it might happen.
Indeed. Our biggest problems with leaving stem from the EU still existsing.
We need to sort out our politics and realign it with the values of the nation, and then reach out to other nations who suddenly realise the post-Brexit EU is unsalvageble.
I bet other people in the EU are looking at the UK now and saying, holy hell I don't want power vacuums and partition. Reports that, for instance, the 5* Movement quietly deleted the section on their website about a euro referendum.
The UK must realise that it has chosen to be a successful country, itself, alone. It is not really on to want everyone else to follow. That's called being a bad neighbour.
Most of Europe runs on PR; long interregnums while a coalition is formed isnt exactly unusual.
The rulings of the ECHR are enforced by the ECJ, so by being in the EU we have to do what the ECHR wants, outside the EU we can chose to ignore it with no real comeback.
No they are not. There was an attempt up until the middle/end of last year to align the ECHR and the ECJ which would have allowed the ECJ to enforce ECHR rulings (basically it involved making the EU a signatory to the EConHR) but it failed.
The ECJ enforces a separate Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Enforcement of ECHR rulings is done by the courts of the individual nations.
Baumbast and R v Secretary Of State For The Home Department [2002] ECR "the Court held that when a child has a right of residence in a Member State according to Union law, this also means that his parent(s) should also have a right of residence due to the principle of respect for family life enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights"
To quote WIkipedia:
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) gives the European Convention on Human Rights "special significance" as a "guiding principle" in its case law. The European Court of Justice uses a set of general principles of law to guide its decision-making process. One such principle is respect for fundamental rights, seen in Article 6(2) of the Treaty Establishing the European Union (Maastricht Treaty): "The Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of Community law." Within this framework, the European Court of Justice uses all treaties that the Member States of the European Union have signed or participated in as interpretive tools for the content and scope of "fundamental rights", while holding the European Convention on Human Rights as a document with "special significance".
However consider International Transport Workers Federation v Viking Line ABP (2007) C-438/05 on the primacy of the Treaties over the ECHR.
Can a pollster please do a survey in Scotland and ask why people voted Remain and whether it was anything to do with supporting the SNP's position or strategy.
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
Why is the Torygraph giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%?
Has anyone here done any research on whether the EU would allow Scotland, as part of an exiting member country, to remain in the EU? I'd thought there were rules against it, that the EU would require a whole new membership application like any other independent country, but Im assuming Im wrong since all I see is the belief that Scotland can 'vote to stay in the EU' as if that is unquestionably an option on the table?
Wow. We forget how much Brexit will destabiise the EU, even as it impacts us.
A despairing REMAIANIAC Tory friend of mine, last night, told me that the iUK's best hope was for the EU to completely fall apart. Or be reduced to a core, so we cannot be bullied so easily.
Looks like it might happen.
Indeed. Our biggest problems with leaving stem from the EU still existsing.
We need to sort out our politics and realign it with the values of the nation, and then reach out to other nations who suddenly realise the post-Brexit EU is unsalvageble.
I bet other people in the EU are looking at the UK now and saying, holy hell I don't want power vacuums and partition. Reports that, for instance, the 5* Movement quietly deleted the section on their website about a euro referendum.
The UK must realise that it has chosen to be a successful country, itself, alone. It is not really on to want everyone else to follow. That's called being a bad neighbour.
Most of Europe runs on PR; long interregnums while a coalition is formed isnt exactly unusual.
Come on, the power vacuum is a lot more than who will replace Cameron. It is about what will replace the EU and whether there is a majority for any potential path forward without risking the total realignment of politics in favour of Ukip.
They're moving to a genuine two tier Europe, which is the sensible way.
The EU is the Eurozone; EFTA are the rest.
It's just the rebalancing the arrangement now. Add UK, Denmark, Sweden to the Swiss, Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein.
It also makes it very clear that Scotland will have to accept the Euro if they want to go and join the EU.
Of more interest is whos in the Euro who should be out ?
If Juncker is that mad then he will cause real problems. Frankfurter Allgemeine who ran the artcile are calling for him to go and comparing him to Sepp Blatter
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
Highly probably done by Remainers. We live in the age of the democratisation of the false flag. I've seen members of forums and posters in news threads join under aliases specifically to make 'a side' look awful. Horrid practise. I think I'd feel utterly empty inside if I were to do that. But it happens.
So there's no such thing as a cretinous xenophobe - they're all people in favour of EU membership pretending. You must have lived a seriously sheltered existence.
I'm not denying the existence of the cretinous xenophobe, and I trust you would not deny the existence of astro-turfers, trolls and other associated pond life.
I'm going to put your 'Highly probably done by Remainers' remark down as 'unfortunate' and leave it at that.
I'll take that as a yes.
Take it as you wish. But I disagree with your use of the words "highly probable". Occam's razor would advise that if we see a sudden uptick in attacks on migrants after a campaign involving LEAVE campaigners Screaming At Migrants and LEAVE newspapers incessantly covering migrants, then LEAVE personnel/voters would be the first logical suspects
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency if a domino effect occurs
Anymore escalation in racism, and the Americans and French voters might recoil against Trump and Le Pen.
Who do you think are voting for Trump and Le Pen, not the liberal upper middle classes but the working and lower middle classes who backed Brexit!
They're moving to a genuine two tier Europe, which is the sensible way.
The EU is the Eurozone; EFTA are the rest.
It's just the rebalancing the arrangement now. Add UK, Denmark, Sweden to the Swiss, Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein.
It also makes it very clear that Scotland will have to accept the Euro if they want to go and join the EU.
I think that's absolutely right, and the sooner we get to that conclusion the better.
I'd settle for this, but no doubt free movement of people and goods will be part of that arrangement. So some would scream betrayal.
48% would have to agree, 10% would agree in principle, another 10% wouldn't feel strongly. More than enough and tends towards politicians' tendency to pick the route of least change.
It appears many leavers thought they were voting for deportation
Shhh
Posting things like that upsets people here.
I posted on Friday morning that it was abundantly clear the Leavers a) did not expect to win b) did not want to win c) had no plan if they did win. That has proved true.
Anecdote: spoke to a barmaid last night, she voted Leave. How did she feel when she woke up on Friday morning: "scared. There has to be a plan, but there is no plan." How would she vote if re-run: "oh god, I wouldn't vote"
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
Sean, certainly disgusting behaviour that must be stamped out. Equally disgusting, however, is some of the shit I've seen on Facebook. One friend of mine was happily advocating banning uneducated (rather than stupid) people from voting.
I've seen innumerable examples of tweets/comments from people witnessing unpleasantness to immigrants and frankly I'm ashamed.
It appears many leavers thought they were voting for deportation - who'd have thought that would happen after the positive upbeat economically focused campaign waged by leave?
Have you witnessed any of it yourself first hand? If not, I would take it with a pinch of salt.
Huffington Post has published the videos, photos and tweets. The incidents range in severity and most fairly trivial, but it's a disturbing pattern nevertheless.
"... If you can solve to keep FoM in such a way that it allows BoJo to credibly claim that he has restricted it then it works."
Mr. Charles, I have been reading your posts on here on here with interest and seriousness for some few years. In that time I have never seen you descend to the language of the politicians.
That sentence is unworthy of you and your family. For what the sentence says, to me at least, is that it doesn't matter if FoM has been restricted as long as people can be tricked into thinking it has. Thats the sort of thing Ed Balls used to com up with, "We need to do X so that the electorate will believe Y" - it doesn't matter whether Y is true as long as we can get the plebs to believe it for long enough.
I apologise if I have picked you up on some loose language just after Sunday luncheon, but that sort of talk is really not on. It is in fact the sort of talk that has lead us to where we are today. The plebs have had enough of being conned by their betters.
I was meaning keeping the principle of FoM (to satisfy the EU) while addressing the negative outcomes it can generate. If you can find a way that effectively restricts free movement to the UK to being from western Europe then I think the impact on the ordinary person in the UK will be far less I quite like having a GDP per capita ratio as a way of doing this (ie you have FoM if your GDP per capita is no less than 90% of that in the UK) but very open to other suggestions.
I think that falls into the territory of reasonable compromise even if it isn't the absolute letter of what people voted for.
Thank you, Mr. Charles. I can see what you are getting at now. I apologise for doubting you.
Not sure I agree, but I'd probably go along with the idea.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
Highly probably done by Remainers. We live in the age of the democratisation of the false flag. I've seen members of forums and posters in news threads join under aliases specifically to make 'a side' look awful. Horrid practise. I think I'd feel utterly empty inside if I were to do that. But it happens.
So there's no such thing as a cretinous xenophobe - they're all people in favour of EU membership pretending. You must have lived a seriously sheltered existence.
I'm not denying the existence of the cretinous xenophobe, and I trust you would not deny the existence of astro-turfers, trolls and other associated pond life.
I'm going to put your 'Highly probably done by Remainers' remark down as 'unfortunate' and leave it at that.
I'll take that as a yes.
Take it as you wish. But I disagree with your use of the words "highly probable". Occam's razor would advise that if we see a sudden uptick in attacks on migrants after a campaign involving LEAVE campaigners Screaming At Migrants and LEAVE newspapers incessantly covering migrants, then LEAVE personnel/voters would be the first logical suspects
I prefer 'Cui Bono' as a rule of thumb. I've yet to be surprised.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency now if a domino effect occurs
Podemos want to rip up the Treaty of Lisbon and they are a potential winner of the Spanish election. PP are still most likely to win but the polls have Podemos close enough to win it.
Yes, looks like another hung parliament with Podemos having more seats in Parliament
Can a pollster please do a survey in Scotland and ask why people voted Remain and whether it was anything to do with supporting the SNP's position or strategy.
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
Why is the Torygraph giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%?
Has anyone here done any research on whether the EU would allow Scotland, as part of an exiting member country, to remain in the EU? I'd thought there were rules against it, that the EU would require a whole new membership application like any other independent country, but Im assuming Im wrong since all I see is the belief that Scotland can 'vote to stay in the EU' as if that is unquestionably an option on the table?
They allowed Denmark to remain when Greenland left... maybe not the best analogy
Can a pollster please do a survey in Scotland and ask why people voted Remain and whether it was anything to do with supporting the SNP's position or strategy.
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
Why is the Torygraph giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%?
Has anyone here done any research on whether the EU would allow Scotland, as part of an exiting member country, to remain in the EU? I'd thought there were rules against it, that the EU would require a whole new membership application like any other independent country, but Im assuming Im wrong since all I see is the belief that Scotland can 'vote to stay in the EU' as if that is unquestionably an option on the table?
IANAL but I'm pretty sure it would need a new accession treaty, which all member states would have to ratify. This would be more than a formality, but as long as Spain agreed I'd have thought it could happen: Everybody would be able to point to some of their own citizens who were studying or working in Scotland and would lose out by refusing to ratify and thus changing the status quo on the ground.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency now if a domino effect occurs
Podemos want to rip up the Treaty of Lisbon and they are a potential winner of the Spanish election. PP are still most likely to win but the polls have Podemos close enough to win it.
Yes, looks like another hung parliament with Podemos having more seats in Parliament
Yes, they merged with the Communists, and have basically kept all of their vote.
Wow. We forget how much Brexit will destabiise the EU, even as it impacts us.
A despairing REMAIANIAC Tory friend of mine, last night, told me that the iUK's best hope was for the EU to completely fall apart. Or be reduced to a core, so we cannot be bullied so easily.
Looks like it might happen.
Indeed. Our biggest problems with leaving stem from the EU still existsing.
We need to sort out our politics and realign it with the values of the nation, and then reach out to other nations who suddenly realise the post-Brexit EU is unsalvageble.
I bet other people in the EU are looking at the UK now and saying, holy hell I don't want power vacuums and partition. Reports that, for instance, the 5* Movement quietly deleted the section on their website about a euro referendum.
The UK must realise that it has chosen to be a successful country, itself, alone. It is not really on to want everyone else to follow. That's called being a bad neighbour.
Most of Europe runs on PR; long interregnums while a coalition is formed isnt exactly unusual.
Come on, the power vacuum is a lot more than who will replace Cameron. It is about what will replace the EU and whether there is a majority for any potential path forward without risking the total realignment of politics in favour of Ukip.
I think youre forgetting how complex coalitions are. In the UK we are used to cleanish results, but in 2010 it took a week to get a government. Given no-one really expected a Leave vote I suspect there is a lot of haggling going on this weekend.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency now if a domino effect occurs
Hopefully our influence is not that great in the US, to be honest I doubt that it is. The French will just shrug at the strange antics of 'les rosbifs'.
Why do you think Trump flew to the UK the day after Brexit? To bask in the glory of course. Why do you think Le Pen held a press conference the day after congratulating the Brits? To show that the momentum is with her!
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
Highly probably done by Remainers. We live in the age of the democratisation of the false flag. I've seen members of forums and posters in news threads join under aliases specifically to make 'a side' look awful. Horrid practise. I think I'd feel utterly empty inside if I were to do that. But it happens.
So there's no such thing as a cretinous xenophobe - they're all people in favour of EU membership pretending. You must have lived a seriously sheltered existence.
I'm not denying the existence of the cretinous xenophobe, and I trust you would not deny the existence of astro-turfers, trolls and other associated pond life.
I'm going to put your 'Highly probably done by Remainers' remark down as 'unfortunate' and leave it at that.
I'll take that as a yes.
Take it as you wish. But I disagree with your use of the words "highly probable". Occam's razor would advise that if we see a sudden uptick in attacks on migrants after a campaign involving LEAVE campaigners Screaming At Migrants and LEAVE newspapers incessantly covering migrants, then LEAVE personnel/voters would be the first logical suspects
Can a pollster please do a survey in Scotland and ask why people voted Remain and whether it was anything to do with supporting the SNP's position or strategy.
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
Why is the Torygraph giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%?
Has anyone here done any research on whether the EU would allow Scotland, as part of an exiting member country, to remain in the EU? I'd thought there were rules against it, that the EU would require a whole new membership application like any other independent country, but Im assuming Im wrong since all I see is the belief that Scotland can 'vote to stay in the EU' as if that is unquestionably an option on the table?
Barroso was quite clear at Sindy 1 that a vote for independence by Scotland would require a totally new application for EU membership, not simple succession.
Scotland's argument that the Vienna Convention on Succession applies is somewhat shaky, in that neither the EU nor the UK (hence Scotland) have ever signed, let alone ratified/acceded to the convention.
He is enamored with calling this the end the death ect ect of Corbyn.
I can't actually understand how he believes all this when Corbyn is standing on such solid ground and his enemies on such flimsy ground.
The battlefield (europe) could not have been more favourable for Corbyn (except foreign policy), especially after the Labour MP's have been proven so out of touch on the issue.
And don't forget the lingering animosity towards the MP's from Labour, the main reason why Corbyn was elected was because the Labour party hates it's own MP's. The view is that the MP's are some kind of out of touch aristocrats who need the chop, and their behaviour proves it.
In what way is Corbyn standing on solid ground? His only 'strength' was his comprehensive victory last year but views might well have changed among members, supporters and unions since then. People have seen him in action and while he may be many things, he ain't a leader.
More pertinently, a leader *has* to command at least the passive support of his or her MPs. Corbyn quite clearly no longer does. It's certainly ironic that after so many issues where Corbyn's been out of touch, the one that the MPs finally revolt over is one where the leader's closer to the voters than they are - but it's also beside the point. The pertinent fact is that they are acting, not why.
Corbyn may or may not survive the day. Quite probably he will, given that no-one can force him out at the moment and he will only go if he chooses to. The next hurdle is Tuesday. If he hasn't resigned by then, he will be no confidenced. Today's resignations are the equivalent of the first vote in the 1990 Tory leadership election. Even loyal MPs will know that Corbyn is so damaged that he can't credibly carry on even if they would have wanted him to (obviously, not all but enough to keep the tide flowing heavily against him). How does he carry on after that? Every interviewer and every other political party will bring it up at every opportunity.
Whether or not the MPs who resigned and those who supported their actions are punished by the CLPs is for another day. The deeds are done and cannot be undone.
Corbyn will not resign under any circumstances. The membership is likely to re-elect him. Labour will become even more irrelevant. But MPs have no choice but to do what they're doing.
"Osborne should just carry on and do the job he is paid to do - I take it then you would be happy for him to bring forward the budget he proposed during the referendum?"
I would laugh my socks off but it will never happen, and you know it won't. We have the EU by the short and curlies. We are the contagion hanging round to wreak havoc unless the EU submits.
Cameron could have come back and said "I recommend Leave." The Churchillian comparison would have been complimentary then. He can still partially redeem himself by standing firm for a few months, when even Mr P will have crept out from behind the settee.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
I agree though once the genie is out of the bottle who knows where it will end, I think there is now a strong chance Trump wins the US Presidency and Le Pen the French Presidency now if a domino effect occurs
Podemos want to rip up the Treaty of Lisbon and they are a potential winner of the Spanish election. PP are still most likely to win but the polls have Podemos close enough to win it.
Yes, looks like another hung parliament with Podemos having more seats in Parliament
Yes, they merged with the Communists, and have basically kept all of their vote.
Hoping for Podemos to break 30%. Then we could have another 1989 in Europe.
I still think LEAVE was the right choice in a hideous, binary decision that could and should have been avoided, but only a simpleton would claim it's all going swimmingly so far. LEAVE have said some extraordinary things.
Hopefully a passing phase of idiocy. But still. Hmpft.
Highly probably done by Remainers. We live in the age of the democratisation of the false flag. I've seen members of forums and posters in news threads join under aliases specifically to make 'a side' look awful. Horrid practise. I think I'd feel utterly empty inside if I were to do that. But it happens.
So there's no such thing as a cretinous xenophobe - they're all people in favour of EU membership pretending. You must have lived a seriously sheltered existence.
I'm not denying the existence of the cretinous xenophobe, and I trust you would not deny the existence of astro-turfers, trolls and other associated pond life.
I'm going to put your 'Highly probably done by Remainers' remark down as 'unfortunate' and leave it at that.
I'll take that as a yes.
Take it as you wish. But I disagree with your use of the words "highly probable". Occam's razor would advise that if we see a sudden uptick in attacks on migrants after a campaign involving LEAVE campaigners Screaming At Migrants and LEAVE newspapers incessantly covering migrants, then LEAVE personnel/voters would be the first logical suspects
I prefer 'Cui Bono' as a rule of thumb. I've yet to be surprised.
Don't be silly. It's perfectly fine to argue that these people cannot be remotely representative of the vast majority of Leave voters. One can have more of a debate about whether the nature of the Leave campaign has led to an increased confidence for such individuals to emerge from under their stones.
But the idea that this is Remainers wandering about the various areas of the country motivated by making racists look bad. Have a word.
Mr. Dog, I believe Juncker's said it can't happen.
Mr. Speedy, at least there's one realm of continued Chipping Nortonian success.
Thanks Mr Dancer. I cant help wondering why no one (e.g. Ruth) is mentioning that to the Scottish people while Nicola is talking it up as pretty much a done deal. I find it frankly amazing that support for independence isn't higher after the past few days of hysteria and nihilism in the media and on social media, the fact that the UK government has apparently run away, and Nicola wildly promising the broad sunlit uplands of EU paradise. Interesting times.
"... If you can solve to keep FoM in such a way that it allows BoJo to credibly claim that he has restricted it then it works."
Mr. Charles, I have been reading your posts on here on here with interest and seriousness for some few years. In that time I have never seen you descend to the language of the politicians.
That sentence is unworthy of you and your family. For what the sentence says, to me at least, is that it doesn't matter if FoM has been restricted as long as people can be tricked into thinking it has. Thats the sort of thing Ed Balls used to com up with, "We need to do X so that the electorate will believe Y" - it doesn't matter whether Y is true as long as we can get the plebs to believe it for long enough.
I apologise if I have picked you up on some loose language just after Sunday luncheon, but that sort of talk is really not on. It is in fact the sort of talk that has lead us to where we are today. The plebs have had enough of being conned by their betters.
I was meaning keeping the principle of FoM (to satisfy the EU) while addressing the negative outcomes it can generate. If you can find a way that effectively restricts free movement to the UK to being from western Europe then I think the impact on the ordinary person in the UK will be far less I quite like having a GDP per capita ratio as a way of doing this (ie you have FoM if your GDP per capita is no less than 90% of that in the UK) but very open to other suggestions.
I think that falls into the territory of reasonable compromise even if it isn't the absolute letter of what people voted for.
Similar to this proposal from, I think, Lowlander (apologies if I have got that wrong).
"The EU could have resolved this by having a stratified policy over free movement, by effectively splitting Shengen into three or four tiers, where free movement is permitted but only available at your current national tier. So you can freely move between countries of similar income levels.
This would have effectively killed the main driver between mass movement while in the long term allowing true free movement (assuming all countries eventually move to similar income levels)."
They're moving to a genuine two tier Europe, which is the sensible way.
The EU is the Eurozone; EFTA are the rest.
It's just the rebalancing the arrangement now. Add UK, Denmark, Sweden to the Swiss, Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein.
It also makes it very clear that Scotland will have to accept the Euro if they want to go and join the EU.
I think that's absolutely right, and the sooner we get to that conclusion the better.
I'd settle for this, but no doubt free movement of people and goods will be part of that arrangement. So some would scream betrayal.
some would, but given the closeness of the vote there will have to be compromises if it is to work. I would happily have voted for outer core but Cameron didnt take the offer.
Can a pollster please do a survey in Scotland and ask why people voted Remain and whether it was anything to do with supporting the SNP's position or strategy.
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
Why is the Torygraph giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%?
Has anyone here done any research on whether the EU would allow Scotland, as part of an exiting member country, to remain in the EU? I'd thought there were rules against it, that the EU would require a whole new membership application like any other independent country, but Im assuming Im wrong since all I see is the belief that Scotland can 'vote to stay in the EU' as if that is unquestionably an option on the table?
They allowed Denmark to remain when Greenland left... maybe not the best analogy
I think the more relevant question would be, "Would they have allowed Greenland to remain had Denmark left?"
However, as all that was decades ago before the EU even existed it probably doesn't matter.
Can a pollster please do a survey in Scotland and ask why people voted Remain and whether it was anything to do with supporting the SNP's position or strategy.
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
Why is the Torygraph giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%?
Has anyone here done any research on whether the EU would allow Scotland, as part of an exiting member country, to remain in the EU? I'd thought there were rules against it, that the EU would require a whole new membership application like any other independent country, but Im assuming Im wrong since all I see is the belief that Scotland can 'vote to stay in the EU' as if that is unquestionably an option on the table?
They allowed Denmark to remain when Greenland left... maybe not the best analogy
No, not a good analogy. Denmark was the member, and looks after Greenland's foreign affairs. So the member did not quit.
He is enamored with calling this the end the death ect ect of Corbyn.
I can't actually understand how he believes all this when Corbyn is standing on such solid ground and his enemies on such flimsy ground.
The battlefield (europe) could not have been more favourable for Corbyn (except foreign policy), especially after the Labour MP's have been proven so out of touch on the issue.
And don't forget the lingering animosity towards the MP's from Labour, the main reason why Corbyn was elected was because the Labour party hates it's own MP's. The view is that the MP's are some kind of out of touch aristocrats who need the chop, and their behaviour proves it.
In what way is Corbyn standing on solid ground? His only 'strength' was his comprehensive victory last year but views might well have changed among members, supporters and unions since then. People have seen him in action and while he may be many things, he ain't a leader.
More pertinently, a leader *has* to command at least the passive support of his or her MPs. Corbyn quite clearly no longer does. It's certainly ironic that after so many issues where Corbyn's been out of touch, the one that the MPs finally revolt over is one where the leader's closer to the voters than they are - but it's also beside the point. The pertinent fact is that they are acting, not why.
Corbyn may or may not survive the day. Quite probably he will, given that no-one can force him out at the moment and he will only go if he chooses to. The next hurdle is Tuesday. If he hasn't resigned by then, he will be no confidenced. Today's resignations are the equivalent of the first vote in the 1990 Tory leadership election. Even loyal MPs will know that Corbyn is so damaged that he can't credibly carry on even if they would have wanted him to (obviously, not all but enough to keep the tide flowing heavily against him). How does he carry on after that? Every interviewer and every other political party will bring it up at every opportunity.
Whether or not the MPs who resigned and those who supported their actions are punished by the CLPs is for another day. The deeds are done and cannot be undone.
Corbyn will not resign under any circumstances. The membership is likely to re-elect him. Labour will become even more irrelevant. But MPs have no choice but to do what they're doing.
Presumably, they have planned better. Very few big guns have come out. Benn was actually sacked.
Corbyn will not resign under any circumstances. The membership is likely to re-elect him. Labour will become even more irrelevant. But MPs have no choice but to do what they're doing.
Can't find the thing I saw earlier on Twitter but it doesn't seem to be clear that he'd be able to get on the ballot.
Corbyn will not resign under any circumstances. The membership is likely to re-elect him. Labour will become even more irrelevant. But MPs have no choice but to do what they're doing.
Can't find the thing I saw earlier on Twitter but it doesn't seem to be clear that he'd be able to get on the ballot.
Comments
Have phoned Jeremy & said if required, I'm prepared to serve. I am prepared to make that sacrifice for the Labour Party.
Heheh
The big change since December's election is that Podemos has merged with the Communists, which puts them on perhaps 25%, against 20% (plus 5% for the Communists last time). The PSOE has likely lost a couple of percent.
So, the likely outcome is:
PP - 29% (unchanged)
Podemos - 25% (+5%, all from the Communists having gone)
PSOE - 20% (-1%)
C - 15% (unchanged)
That basically will give the left wing grouping of PSOE + P more seats than PP + C. However, two things make that fundamentally unstable:
1. They still won't have 50% of the seats, and are likely to be around 10 short. Most of the remainder are Catalan nationalists, many of which are rather right wing.
2. The PSOE isn't going to be the minority partner in a coalition with Podemos, because that would be signing their own death warrant.
So, the likeliest outcome is that the Left wing block and the Right wing one each end up short.
You therefore have one of three possible outcomes:
- PP & C go into a coalition government and PSOE abstains on the confidence vote (probably the most likely outcome)
- PP & PSOE do a grand coalition
- More elections...
"Sack Carney! Don't think so, he's the only bloke who's appeared calm."
He may not have been a Leaver, but he'll do the job he's asked.
I have always suspected that the EU will either play hardball (very risky and probably terminal), or come to a compromise after a pretend argument (the logical choice).
The majority of the UK would prefer an old-fashioned common market with more control over our decisions (and this includes immigration). We have the high cards now. We've gone all-in and the EU has to bluff or concede.
They will haggle and offer us a compromise or see all their sixty years of effort go gurgling down the plughole. Dexit, Frexit, Grexit, and Nexit loom.
They will fold.
They may lick their wounds and try for political union later, but they're full of sound and fury at the moment, and it signifies nothing.
https://twitter.com/FullickMarlon/status/747093442241630208
They hold a Shadow Cabinet meeting.
[Not my joke!]
https://twitter.com/StaceBoop/status/747072631417995265
Edit Apologies I see Robert has made exactly the same points.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/747012267795943424
Some light relief amidst the doom and gloom. Hope injuries from the rollercoaster accident are minimal, though that seems unlikely.
"No, when Boomers were in their 20's people in their twenties were one of the richest segments of society. Pensioners were dirt poor. As the Boomers aged so the welath followed them to where we are now. The proportion of wealth between those who are in their twenties and those who are 65+ has almost completely reversed. All through their lives the boomers have been one of the wealthiest segments of society."
Mr. Alistair,
That graph looks at disposable income, does it not?
Then might I suggest you cross-reference it with the growth of occupational pension schemes, particularly the reform introduced by Barbara Castle. Pensioners used to be very poor because they depended on government handouts, then along came defined benefit occupational pensions (i.e. decades of saving) and gradually the pensioners became less poor. Sod all to do with government benefits (though I agree some of those on offer currently are silly). The problem I think comes from a different direction.
As a young man I had a very high disposable income - why shouldn't I? After all I was single and lived in barracks ( a type of opportunity cost) where what I received at the weekly pay parade was my disposable income. When on leave, if I stayed with my mother hse demanded a third of my disposable income as my contribution to the household, I paid up willingly. My son is in much the same situation today, young single, no commitments he can afford to indulge himself, but his mother wants her cut when he is at home.
Of course as we get older we take on commitments, spouses, children, mortgages, etc. and our disposable income drops, sometimes dramatically. In the mid-nineties mine reached a low of £20 per month, out of which we had to fund the needs of a two-year old. However we never stopped saving (12-15% of income plus paying the mortgage). Twenty years later we are debt free and comfortable.
So, my son is, more or less, in the same position I was at his age and Herself and I are considerably better off than my parents generation. So, I am afraid your graph with its talk of rebalancing state benefits cuts no ice at all.
Future generations may not be so lucky but then I am afraid you must blame succesive Chancellor's for fecking up the occupational pensions in search of short term gain.
@MichaelvdGalien: Remain are probably the sorest losers I’ve ever seen. https://t.co/YBxLIblAu2
@PCollinsTimes: No, it's the sore winners that are the problem. They think their inability to fathom what they have done is my fault https://t.co/7GTlcWp44c
I live in Scotland. I voted Remain. The idea that Scotland should pull out of a union in which it does 65% of its trade (Britain) in order to stay in one where it does 10% (the EU) is absurd. It is utterly disingenuous. The SNP ran in the indyref on "sunshine"; now they want to run in a second referendum on "we've already won", by the sound of it. Their whole line depends on an utterly cynical exploitation of Remain voters.
I know of SNP supporters in England who were being quietly encouraged by the party to vote Leave.
They don't have a majority in Holyrood and therefore they don't have a mandate to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto, but for the record here is what they did say:
"We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. In the next parliament, we will work hard to persuade a majority of the Scottish people that being an independent country is the best option for our country. We will listen to the concerns of people who voted No in 2014 and seek to address them."
The Torygraph is giving more space to the Sunday Post's opinion poll (finding that 59% of people in Scotland support independence) than to the proper one conducted by Panelbase for the Sunday Times, which gave a figure of 52%.
What's that? LeBlexit?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJBeih6JZrs
We need to sort out our politics and realign it with the values of the nation, and then reach out to other nations who suddenly realise the post-Brexit EU is unsalvageble.
are they footballers ?
I cannot believe Germany missed a penalty. That is a first
So Osborne should just carry on and do the job he is paid to do - I take it then you would be happy for him to bring forward the budget he proposed during the referendum?.
"the Court held that when a child has a right of residence in a Member State according to Union law, this also means that his parent(s) should also have a right of residence due to the principle of respect for family life enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights"
a) plan
b) if they've been too cocky to think they'll need to plan, come up with one quickly
c) Inform the public of their plans to reassure them that whilst they did not wish to be in this situation, they are working efficiently to get the best outcome from difficult circumstances.
This is basic stuff! You're defending the indefensible and you know it. These are the people our country would be in the hands of long term had the public voted IN.
If Evans does get tossed overboard, I might give New New New Top Gear another look.
The EU is the Eurozone; EFTA are the rest.
It's just the rebalancing the arrangement now. Add UK, Denmark, Sweden to the Swiss, Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein.
It also makes it very clear that Scotland will have to accept the Euro if they want to go and join the EU.
The UK must realise that it has chosen to be a successful country, itself, alone. It is not really on to want everyone else to follow. That's called being a bad neighbour.
Though I expect that the winner of the Top Gear leadership contest will truly be someone not even presently a member of it.
https://twitter.com/electograph/status/747095786673086464
Water is PP
Grapes IU/Podemos
Strawberries PSOE
Oranges Ciudadanos
If that is the result it's an advance for the left in vote share and a big advance in seats.
Polls close in 40 minutes.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) gives the European Convention on Human Rights "special significance" as a "guiding principle" in its case law. The European Court of Justice uses a set of general principles of law to guide its decision-making process. One such principle is respect for fundamental rights, seen in Article 6(2) of the Treaty Establishing the European Union (Maastricht Treaty): "The Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of Community law." Within this framework, the European Court of Justice uses all treaties that the Member States of the European Union have signed or participated in as interpretive tools for the content and scope of "fundamental rights", while holding the European Convention on Human Rights as a document with "special significance".
However consider International Transport Workers Federation v Viking Line ABP (2007) C-438/05 on the primacy of the Treaties over the ECHR.
P + PSOE quite close to the magic 175 in theory on those numbers.
If Juncker is that mad then he will cause real problems. Frankfurter Allgemeine who ran the artcile are calling for him to go and comparing him to Sepp Blatter
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/kommentar-junckers-verzweiflungstat-14310031.html
Mr. Speedy, at least there's one realm of continued Chipping Nortonian success.
I'm sure David Cameron will be happy to go to Sweden and recommend this course of action to the Moderate Party hash tag in o cent face
Not clear at the moment whether the Eagle sisters have or have not announced their resignations yet.
Anecdote: spoke to a barmaid last night, she voted Leave. How did she feel when she woke up on Friday morning: "scared. There has to be a plan, but there is no plan." How would she vote if re-run: "oh god, I wouldn't vote"
Watson "deeply disappointed" that Benn was sacked...
I expect Gove will be co-chair of Boris' leadership campaign if he runs, other co-chair will be a Remainer, running on 'unity' ticket
Not sure I agree, but I'd probably go along with the idea.
Scotland's argument that the Vienna Convention on Succession applies is somewhat shaky, in that neither the EU nor the UK (hence Scotland) have ever signed, let alone ratified/acceded to the convention.
"Osborne should just carry on and do the job he is paid to do - I take it then you would be happy for him to bring forward the budget he proposed during the referendum?"
I would laugh my socks off but it will never happen, and you know it won't. We have the EU by the short and curlies. We are the contagion hanging round to wreak havoc unless the EU submits.
Cameron could have come back and said "I recommend Leave." The Churchillian comparison would have been complimentary then. He can still partially redeem himself by standing firm for a few months, when even Mr P will have crept out from behind the settee.
But the idea that this is Remainers wandering about the various areas of the country motivated by making racists look bad. Have a word.
"The EU could have resolved this by having a stratified policy over free movement, by effectively splitting Shengen into three or four tiers, where free movement is permitted but only available at your current national tier. So you can freely move between countries of similar income levels.
This would have effectively killed the main driver between mass movement while in the long term allowing true free movement (assuming all countries eventually move to similar income levels)."
However, as all that was decades ago before the EU even existed it probably doesn't matter.
https://twitter.com/guardianopinion/status/747092267144359937