politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Team Corbyn say Jez will carry on if the confidence motion
Comments
-
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
0 -
I think they'll need a general election first though (late September/early October) to get support from the electorate. What they don't want to risk is another referendum (unlike what the idiot Jeremy Hunt is saying) after the negotiation.SeanT said:
It's not panic, there is a clear and present danger to our economy. But it can be saved if we keep cool heads, and go for Norway, as Munchau says. That respects the vote - LEAVE, and keeps the single market intact.MikeK said:
I have never seen such panic as these latest posts on PB. It's frantic; it's manic, and SeanT, who should know better, is leader of the pack.SeanT said:
We're already playing with fire. The economy might burn down. Our choices are dwindling, as I saywilliamglenn said:
For the people who just voted leave, the primary expression of lack of sovereignty is immigration. They are seriously playing with fire if this is on the table.SeanT said:
Boris is pro-migration so is Hannan, I don't think Cash especially cares. Etc. For them it's all about sovereignty.Richard_Nabavi said:
Thalation increase which they attribute to EU membership is unsustainable.SeanT said:I refer honourable PBers to my previous post. Not because it was any good, but because the link is important
Wolfgang Munchau (very astute on EU matters, and fairly EU-agnostic, by FT standards) nails the future. It will be Norway, and he explains why. I relink, here
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eb8dbe8c-3d0c-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/comment/feed//product#axzz4CsSQ3HZ4
Besides the point is they will HAVE to do this, or face economic meltdown, the destruction of the City, desertion of party donors. Choices are narrowing, by the day.
This is just about the only solution which looks remotely democratic (i.e. we really are LEAVING) while saving the economy
It would secure 60% of the electorate in a vote.
What we can't do is just wait, and wait, and wait, and piddle about with all this non-triggering Article 50 stuff, or call a new referendum thingy, forever. It sound nice in theory, but in practise it means companies stop investing, money stops flowing, people stop spending, as they wait to see what happens. Paralysis. And that IS disaster.
On Sept 2 the new Tory leader should (and I reckon will) come out and say We're going for EEA, keeping the single market, and some new form of Free movement, with new restrictions on benefits.
Remember, that new Tory leader will HAVE to own a concrete and coherent plan. It will surely be this.0 -
You can largely solve that by saying "anyone who's been resident here for eight years".PlatoSaid said:
The only way it works is if just British born citizens get auto benefits - everyone else is excluded. Even then, it's The Establishment trying to get around what the populace believed they voted for.SeanT said:
There is also a way for us to square the immigration circle. May (or Boris) should propose, along with joining EEA, that our benefits system becomes contributory, thus ending much of the pull factorSunil_Prasannan said:
Sounds good to me. Sean T should be Tory Leader!SeanT said:
This is the deal the Tories will negotiate, under May (or maybe even Boris).SouthamObserver said:What we are witnessing is the death of the Labour party as a potential party of government. The Labour membership would prefer that to allowing a "Blairite" (ie, anyone who is not Jeremy Corbyn) to be leader. The comfort blanket is too warm, the membership - largely well-off and unaffected personally by Tory policy - too detached from real life. Labour will develop into a full-blown socialist party and will gradually wither away into complete irrelevance. A new centre-left party will take its place. All that, though, will take time.
Unfortunately, what it means is that a right wing Tory government that needs just 37% of the vote to stay in power will negotiate the terms of Brexit largely unscrutinised and unopposed. And that will result in a deal which will hurt ordinary voters and alienate them even further from the political process.
That's how decent Jeremy Corbyn is.
The Norway option, with Free movement and a promise of another vote in ten years.
There aren't enough die-hard anti-migrationists in the Tory party to stop it. Most Tory LEAVERS are in the Hannan camp: Sovereigntists. They will be content with this, the City will be content with this. Labour and UKIP wwc voters will not be content, but the Tories won't care
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eb8dbe8c-3d0c-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/comment/feed//product#axzz4CsSQ3HZ4
This would also be popular with quite a lot of voters, in itself.
It does politicians no favours to subvert what the people decided. Sovereignty and control are inimical with FoM.0 -
Corbyn still adopting the Assad policy of clinging on until he's the least worst option to stitch things back together.
Trouble is that the PLP will look like downtown Aleppo by then.0 -
If we go for the Norway option we still have that. We may find that that is the best option available but it is going to be hugely unpopular. It was not in my top 3 concerns but no one can seriously argue that Leave was not about controlling immigration.John_M said:
This isn't a select committee. The broad thrust of a contributory system has some merit. I just doubt our political masters have the balls to tackle health, pension and welfare reform.not_on_fire said:
So not naturalized British citizens? Great way to divide society even further.PlatoSaid said:
The only way it works is if just British born citizens get auto benefits - everyone else is excluded. Even then, it's The Establishment trying to get around what the populace believed they voted for.SeanT said:
There is also a way for us to square the immigration circle. May (or Boris) should propose, along with joining EEA, that our benefits system becomes contributory, thus ending much of the pull factorSunil_Prasannan said:
Sounds good to me. Sean T should be Tory Leader!SeanT said:
This would also be popular with quite a lot of voters, in itself.
It does politicians no favours to subvert what the people decided. Sovereignty and control are inimical with FoM.
I noticed from Cooper's remarks that she still doesn't get it. One million people every three years. It's not difficult to understand.0 -
Could the new Prime Minister take the following approach.
1. Make it clear from the outset that for economic reasons they feel it is imperative to remain in the Single Market. This would placate the markets.
2. Say that they will strive to get a deal on Free Movement and contributions but that this may not be achievable in the short term.
3. Try to achieve 2. but if unsuccessful in the short term then sign up to EFTA/EEA, the Norway model.
4. Continue to negotiate for 2. after 3.
This would "honour" the outcome of the referendum. The UK would leave the EU. What alternative relationship the UK would have with the EU was not voted on in the referendum. A lot of people would be very unhappy re not achieving 2. in the short term but it would remain an aim of the government. However achieving both 1. and 2. in the short term is likely to be unachievable and so something has to give - and the new PM feels 1. has to trump 2.0 -
LOLScott_P said:
Who ate all the pies?YellowSubmarine said:If the answer is Watson what is the question ?
0 -
Some right dafties on here - only one issue was decided last week - that we should leave the EU.
And it was very close.
Now for the government to set out a course - which due to the closeness of the result may well be a compromise on some topics - but if you don't like it vote against them in the next GE.
That's it - what Sir Bufton Tufton of Britain for Independence said on the hustings in Cleethorpes 2 months ago is utterly irrelevant.
0 -
100% Correct. best and most succinct analysis on pbCOM for a long time.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
0 -
Oh FFS. Are you like this at home too?SeanT said:
We're already playing with fire. The economy might burn down. Our choices are dwindling, as I saywilliamglenn said:
For the people who just voted leave, the primary expression of lack of sovereignty is immigration. They are seriously playing with fire if this is on the table.SeanT said:
Boris is pro-migration so is Hannan, I don't think Cash especially cares. Etc. For them it's all about sovereignty.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's very much a City view, though. When he says "A time-limited but speedily agreed Norway option would respect the will of the voters, the political reality in the UK and in the EU, prove economically least costly and it is flexible", he's right on the last two points, arguably right on the second, but completely wrong on the first.SeanT said:I refer honourable PBers to my previous post. Not because it was any good, but because the link is important
Wolfgang Munchau (very astute on EU matters, and fairly EU-agnostic, by FT standards) nails the future. It will be Norway, and he explains why. I relink, here
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eb8dbe8c-3d0c-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/comment/feed//product#axzz4CsSQ3HZ4
Will it end up with anti-free-movement Leave voters being betrayed? Given the speed of buyers' remorse, which has frankly caught me by surprise, it's not unimaginable, as I thought it would be before the referendum. But there would certainly be one hell of a political cost to it.
Also, I don't think you are right that most Tory Leavers are Hannan-style libertarians. In my experience migration is one their strongest reasons for wanting to leave the EU, essentially because they think the population increase which they attribute to EU membership is unsustainable.
Besides the point is they will HAVE to do this, or face economic meltdown, the destruction of the City, desertion of party donors. Choices are narrowing, by the day.
This is just about the only solution which looks remotely democratic (i.e. we really are LEAVING) while saving the economy
Let's have Chinese. I've ordered it.
Oh, I think Indian would be nicer.
But I've ordered Chinese.
Actually, I fancy a pizza.
But the delivery guy will be here in 10 mins. Should I call to cancel my order? Will they hate me now?
Now ordered Indian. But what if the delivery guy didn't get the cancellation? How can I not tip him?
That pizza did sound tasty...0 -
Better Cheese, better skiing, better wine.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.0 -
We have, and have always had, our Sovereignty. Even Brexiteer Chris Grayling said so last nightMarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
What we get as a member of the EU is economic leverage.0 -
Sadly, a fine analysis as usual from Richard.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well she's the obvious choice, an oven-ready, Corbyn-untainted PM-in-waiting who could match Theresa May for seriousness and make Boris look like a smirking schoolboy.RodCrosby said:
Yvette has also been on manoeuvres this morning...volcanopete said:R4 Wato stating Dan Jarvis has ruled himself out which leaves Eagle and Watson to fight it out for contender against Corbyn.Eagle is still the value bet but the price keeps contracting.25s will do me.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/yvette-cooper-calls-jeremy-corbyn-8301464
Labour would be out of their minds not to choose her as Corbyn's replacement. So it won't be her, I guess.0 -
The PLP might buy into that - but they would have to find them a couple of safe seats first of course.FrankBooth said:I see there is talk of a Southgate/Hoddle dream ticket. A desire to go back to the relative glory days of the 90s when only penalties could stop England and the Prime minister was loved by everyone.
0 -
We can get to Boris later. I've been waiting for the Cameron/Osborne downfall parodies...Scott_P said:This is why Boris has been invisible since Friday
https://twitter.com/petermannionmp/status/7477606601304391680 -
I totally disagree. Vote Leave made the catastrophic attempt of thinking they could publicly differentiate themselves from Farage by excluding him, but in fact all they did is infuriate Farage's camp, and the anti-Brexit lobby made no distinction at all. Far better to have included him from the start and tried to keep him on message. I don't think any of the frothers think good Leaver bad Leaver - they are interchangeable. One of the most popular social media post-Brexit memes is Farage 'admitting' the £350million on the NHS was a mistake. It wasn't even his Bus.Patrick said:
Erm...apart from the fact that all the rhetoric on immigration came from UKIP. Boris and Gove fought hard to ensure Vote Leave was the voice of Leave and not Farage. They fought almost all on sovereignty. UKIP own the nastiness not Boris. He can easily distance himself from it, starting with Farage's somewhat incendiary (but not wrong) speech in the EU Parliament today.Stark_Dawning said:It's bound to be May. The horrific aftermath of Brexit and all that immigration duplicity can then be blamed on silly old Boris. The Tories need to put clear blue water now between themselves and the whole Leave racket.
The absolute crapness of Vote Leave is demonstrated by their total post-Brexit silence on social media. Look at their facebook - thanks for voting folks - bye. By comparison, Leave.EU are still pumping out very good content, debunking the disaster tales etc.0 -
The contribution would be far smaller than we pay now - both Robert Smithson and I using EFTA's own calculations came up with a total UK contribution of around £2 billion gross compared to £15 billion gross at the moment.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.
The amount of EU legislation that applies to the single market is less than 10% of what we are subjected to now.0 -
Jean Monnet was a great visionary indeed.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
0 -
During the campaign Mr Hannan described Brexit as a process, rather than a sudden break.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
Incremental change, at first looks a lot like membership, less so over time.
0 -
The problem, as SeanT has pointed out, is that a custom deal takes years, during which there will be enormous uncertainty. As the two year mark ticks closer, those firms - particularly in financial services - who depend on Financial Passporting will have to move operations abroad "just in case".John_M said:
I think it's going to be a test of the EU. If they can't manage a custom deal for the UK, they're doomed (note for pedants: we might be doomed too of course).Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway.0 -
Hear, hear.MaxPB said:
They are both stupid ideas. Benefits should be payable only to those who have paid into the system for a minimum of 12 out of the last 24 months. Doesn't matter where you're from or what nationality you are. Naturalised, born here, commonwealth citizen, EU citizen. Everyone should get the same bloody treatment, let's just fix the fucking benefits system once and for all. I'm sick of hearing about how British citizens are out competed by EU citizens, until we have a benefits system that incentiveses work and an education system fit for purpose, everything else is just treating the symptoms. Mass immigration is caused by a badly designed benefits system and rubbish education system, let's fix those.not_on_fire said:
So not naturalized British citizens? Great way to divide society even further.0 -
what about Sir Bufton Tufton in Cleethorpes ?Scott_P said:
Even Brexiteer Chris Grayling said so last nightMarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
0 -
If Yvette is interested, I'll back her (again). Last time, I put her #1, unenthusiastically. Because both she and Burnham were being so careful as to what to say that they were coming up with "if on the one hand, ......."
I think she will have learnt from that. Plus Brexit has already happened. Representing a Yorkshire seat, she will have far more understanding of the Labour WWC proble.
She is definitely a ready-made package. But she won't get it.0 -
They have completely deleted their website. All the lies, gone...Luckyguy1983 said:The absolute crapness of Vote Leave is demonstrated by their total post-Brexit silence on social media.
0 -
It's not economically impossible. But this is why we needed to have a destination in mind before we voted.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.0 -
Agree with that. The EU negotiations with the UK will reveal if the EU is really a prison or not. A shitty deal for the UK will seriously deepen the grief in countries like NL, France, Italy and Sweden. I have precisely zero faith that the EU machine is not just this stupid and dogmatic though. The EU is going to come apart and all this speculation will be moot.John_M said:
I think it's going to be a test of the EU. If they can't manage a custom deal for the UK, they're doomed (note for pedants: we might be doomed too of course).Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway.0 -
Hang on, on Wednesday night (when you thought "victory was at the hand for REMAIN) you was claiming the next time we have an "In/Out" referendum you'd have no problems "sticking it to the EU?"Scott_P said:
We have, and have always had, our Sovereignty. Even Brexiteer Chris Grayling said so last nightMarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
What we get as a member of the EU is economic leverage.0 -
Wow Kezia Dugdale actually giving a decent speach, feels raw, real and utterly heartfelt. Of course its cos she's attacking the Tories. Maybe she will learn.
"She said, only the Tories can be trusted to protect Britain. Well, Ruth, how's that going now?"
Brutal.0 -
0
-
I'd be careful Scott, you could be working for them quite soon.Scott_P said:
They have completely deleted their website. All the lies, gone...Luckyguy1983 said:The absolute crapness of Vote Leave is demonstrated by their total post-Brexit silence on social media.
But lying aside, we can both agree they were shite.0 -
No, they've changed their home page. The content is still up.Scott_P said:
They have completely deleted their website. All the lies, gone...Luckyguy1983 said:The absolute crapness of Vote Leave is demonstrated by their total post-Brexit silence on social media.
0 -
Quite. I find the notion that the UK needs to copy exactly what Norway does frankly bizarre.John_M said:
I think it's going to be a test of the EU. If they can't manage a custom deal for the UK, they're doomed (note for pedants: we might be doomed too of course).Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway.
We're the 5th largest economy on the planet. Norway is 16th.0 -
And has now gone into hiding because his "process" is crashing round his earsanotherDave said:During the campaign Mr Hannan described Brexit as a process, rather than a sudden break.
0 -
Welcome to the world where our elected representatives can't tell you the truth because it might affect their reelection prospects.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.0 -
They won the referendum and then disbanded?Scott_P said:
They have completely deleted their website. All the lies, gone...Luckyguy1983 said:The absolute crapness of Vote Leave is demonstrated by their total post-Brexit silence on social media.
0 -
Yes, in 10 years time when the economy is much less reliant on the EU our membership of the single market may just look academic. Already the figures aren't far away, our exports to the EU account for 9.7% of GDP and their exports to the UK account for between 3.5% and 4% of EU GDP depending on who's figures you use. It won't be long until those figures are close enough to say that they need us more than we need them.anotherDave said:
During the campaign Mr Hannan described Brexit as a process, rather than a sudden break.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
Incremental change, at first looks a lot like membership, less so over time.0 -
+1rcs1000 said:
Hear, hear.MaxPB said:
They are both stupid ideas. Benefits should be payable only to those who have paid into the system for a minimum of 12 out of the last 24 months. Doesn't matter where you're from or what nationality you are. Naturalised, born here, commonwealth citizen, EU citizen. Everyone should get the same bloody treatment, let's just fix the fucking benefits system once and for all. I'm sick of hearing about how British citizens are out competed by EU citizens, until we have a benefits system that incentiveses work and an education system fit for purpose, everything else is just treating the symptoms. Mass immigration is caused by a badly designed benefits system and rubbish education system, let's fix those.not_on_fire said:
So not naturalized British citizens? Great way to divide society even further.0 -
OK, I've a lot of respect for your views in this space.rcs1000 said:
The problem, as SeanT has pointed out, is that a custom deal takes years, during which there will be enormous uncertainty. As the two year mark ticks closer, those firms - particularly in financial services - who depend on Financial Passporting will have to move operations abroad "just in case".John_M said:
I think it's going to be a test of the EU. If they can't manage a custom deal for the UK, they're doomed (note for pedants: we might be doomed too of course).Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway.
I'm still going to go and look at some of the bilateral trade flows - numbers are my thing. I suspect that our European trade will be dominated by six or seven countries - probably the same as those that host the European element of the British diaspora.0 -
It clearly isn't impossible. A load of people with vested interests are saying it is. I'm withholding my opprobrium - for now.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.0 -
Not in this case, Robert.rcs1000 said:
Isn't it Uber rather than the immigrants that are cutting minicab wages?chestnut said:
I have worked in both Newham and Redbridge within the last year and listened to complaints about street drinking, mini-cab drivers having their wages undercut, closed shops on employment, etc.murali_s said:
F*cking immigrants - that's what it was all about - scary times ahead.Sunil_Prasannan said:Labour MPs seem to forget that in a lot of their strongholds outside London (and even a couple within London, like Barking), people voted in droves to LEAVE, and so were more in tune with LABOUR LEAVE than LABOUR REMAIN.
None of it from Tories, Kippers or white people.
And Amazon is destroying High Street jobs everywhere.
The closed shop was someone vociferously complaining that the community had changed and he could no longer find work in his trade because his face did not fit with the newly arrived community. Neither the community nor complainant were white British.
A lot of grievances cross racial lines but some pretend it's only a wwc thing.0 -
2. Say that they will strive to get a deal on Free Movement and contributions but that this may not be achievable in the short term.stjohn said:Could the new Prime Minister take the following approach.
1. Make it clear from the outset that for economic reasons they feel it is imperative to remain in the Single Market. This would placate the markets.
2. Say that they will strive to get a deal on Free Movement and contributions but that this may not be achievable in the short term.
3. Try to achieve 2. but if unsuccessful in the short term then sign up to EFTA/EEA, the Norway model.
4. Continue to negotiate for 2. after 3.
This would "honour" the outcome of the referendum. The UK would leave the EU. What alternative relationship the UK would have with the EU was not voted on in the referendum. A lot of people would be very unhappy re not achieving 2. in the short term but it would remain an aim of the government. However achieving both 1. and 2. in the short term is likely to be unachievable and so something has to give - and the new PM feels 1. has to trump 2.
= Never in a million years (Yes Minister)0 -
You misunderstood me - it really got me - I nearly embarrassed myself with mirth!DavidL said:0 -
The danger is that wider legislation gets labelled single market.Richard_Tyndall said:
The contribution would be far smaller than we pay now - both Robert Smithson and I using EFTA's own calculations came up with a total UK contribution of around £2 billion gross compared to £15 billion gross at the moment.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.
The amount of EU legislation that applies to the single market is less than 10% of what we are subjected to now.
I think that's how the EU got round our social policy opt out.
0 -
Am I the only one who thinks Yvette is quite... errrr... cute?surbiton said:If Yvette is interested, I'll back her (again). Last time, I put her #1, unenthusiastically. Because both she and Burnham were being so careful as to what to say that they were coming up with "if on the one hand, ......."
I think she will have learnt from that. Plus Brexit has already happened. Representing a Yorkshire seat, she will have far more understanding of the Labour WWC proble.
She is definitely a ready-made package. But she won't get it.0 -
I believe Ed Balls agrees with you for one.rcs1000 said:
Am I the only one who thinks quite... errrr... cute.surbiton said:If Yvette is interested, I'll back her (again). Last time, I put her #1, unenthusiastically. Because both she and Burnham were being so careful as to what to say that they were coming up with "if on the one hand, ......."
I think she will have learnt from that. Plus Brexit has already happened. Representing a Yorkshire seat, she will have far more understanding of the Labour WWC proble.
She is definitely a ready-made package. But she won't get it.0 -
You do realise that you are aligning yourself with Ed Balls with those comments...rcs1000 said:
Am I the only one who thinks Yvette is quite... errrr... cute?surbiton said:If Yvette is interested, I'll back her (again). Last time, I put her #1, unenthusiastically. Because both she and Burnham were being so careful as to what to say that they were coming up with "if on the one hand, ......."
I think she will have learnt from that. Plus Brexit has already happened. Representing a Yorkshire seat, she will have far more understanding of the Labour WWC proble.
She is definitely a ready-made package. But she won't get it.0 -
Which is why I'm spending most of the summer in Paris thanks to you Brexiteersrcs1000 said:
The problem, as SeanT has pointed out, is that a custom deal takes years, during which there will be enormous uncertainty. As the two year mark ticks closer, those firms - particularly in financial services - who depend on Financial Passporting will have to move operations abroad "just in case".John_M said:
I think it's going to be a test of the EU. If they can't manage a custom deal for the UK, they're doomed (note for pedants: we might be doomed too of course).Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway.0 -
Reading Flexcit/The Market Solution might cheer you up. It makes EFTA membership step one of a phased process by which we reorient our global trade policy and rebuild the Single Market under UNECE supervision. By focusing on smaller scope, flexible bilateral trade and regulatory agreements, we construct an economy where the EU matters less and less.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
However, Norway did veto EU oil regulation on these grounds that they weren't actually single market regulations.anotherDave said:
The danger is that wider legislation gets labelled single market.Richard_Tyndall said:
The contribution would be far smaller than we pay now - both Robert Smithson and I using EFTA's own calculations came up with a total UK contribution of around £2 billion gross compared to £15 billion gross at the moment.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.
The amount of EU legislation that applies to the single market is less than 10% of what we are subjected to now.0 -
You can't if the immigration and asylum system doesn't get rid of those ineligible to be here for a decade.rcs1000 said:
You can largely solve that by saying "anyone who's been resident here for eight years".PlatoSaid said:
The only way it works is if just British born citizens get auto benefits - everyone else is excluded. Even then, it's The Establishment trying to get around what the populace believed they voted for.SeanT said:
There is also a way for us to square the immigration circle. May (or Boris) should propose, along with joining EEA, that our benefits system becomes contributory, thus ending much of the pull factorSunil_Prasannan said:
Sounds good to me. Sean T should be Tory Leader!SeanT said:
This is the deal the Tories will negotiate, under May (or maybe even Boris).SouthamObserver said:What we are witnessing is the death of the Labour party as a potential party of government. The Labour membership would prefer that to allowing a "Blairite" (ie, anyone who is not Jeremy Corbyn) to be leader. The comfort blanket is too warm, the membership - largely well-off and unaffected personally by Tory policy - too detached from real life. Labour will develop into a full-blown socialist party and will gradually wither away into complete irrelevance. A new centre-left party will take its place. All that, though, will take time.
Unfortunately, what it means is that a right wing Tory government that needs just 37% of the vote to stay in power will negotiate the terms of Brexit largely unscrutinised and unopposed. And that will result in a deal which will hurt ordinary voters and alienate them even further from the political process.
That's how decent Jeremy Corbyn is.
The Norway option, with Free movement and a promise of another vote in ten years.
There aren't enough die-hard anti-migrationists in the Tory party to stop it. Most Tory LEAVERS are in the Hannan camp: Sovereigntists. They will be content with this, the City will be content with this. Labour and UKIP wwc voters will not be content, but the Tories won't care
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eb8dbe8c-3d0c-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/comment/feed//product#axzz4CsSQ3HZ4
This would also be popular with quite a lot of voters, in itself.
It does politicians no favours to subvert what the people decided. Sovereignty and control are inimical with FoM.
Now that's an organisational issue - but we need to restore faith in politics. Right now, only 5 days on - I see far too much *too hard tray* behaviour.0 -
The charter of fundamental rights will never be single market related, as an example. And it would only be applicable for business we do in the EU.anotherDave said:
The danger is that wider legislation gets labelled single market.Richard_Tyndall said:
The contribution would be far smaller than we pay now - both Robert Smithson and I using EFTA's own calculations came up with a total UK contribution of around £2 billion gross compared to £15 billion gross at the moment.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.
The amount of EU legislation that applies to the single market is less than 10% of what we are subjected to now.
I think that's how the EU got round our social policy opt out.0 -
Told you sarcasm doesn't work! There really should be an emoticon so we can tell.felix said:
You misunderstood me - it really got me - I nearly embarrassed myself with mirth!DavidL said:0 -
FrankBooth said:
I see there is talk of a Southgate/Hoddle dream ticket. A desire to go back to the relative glory days of the 90s when only penalties could stop England and the Prime minister was loved by everyone.
I would support that. Hoddle is a great tactician.0 -
He's just achieved something he's dedicated his whole adult life to. A short holiday is hardly excessive.Scott_P said:
And has now gone into hiding because his "process" is crashing round his earsanotherDave said:During the campaign Mr Hannan described Brexit as a process, rather than a sudden break.
0 -
This Scottish Parliamentary debate is fantastic. Ruth is getting utterly eviscerated from all sides. The Tories seem cowed, they're unable to raise even a weak murmur of protest every time a new speaker rips into their leader and their party.0
-
Wait wasn't she the PM in waiting ?Lowlander said:This Scottish Parliamentary debate is fantastic. Ruth is getting utterly eviscerated from all sides. The Tories seem cowed, they're unable to raise even a weak murmur of protest every time a new speaker rips into their leader and their party.
0 -
The leave manifesto was economically impossible.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
You knew it and voted for it anyway.
You voted for a very large, permanent paycut in exchange for pulling up the drawbridge.
0 -
MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
Yes well you can't say you weren't warned. The entire idea that we could walk away from the single market and all would be tickety boo is and always was the stuff of deranged eurosceptic fantasy.0 -
Yes, there's a lot in that, although I also know a lot of people in between who are simply party loyalists who wish the rival factions would STFU. There is VERY little sympathy for the people who have been destabilising the party from day 1, but equally even on the left there is some palpable doubt. What happens now will influence the leadership election and subsequent evevents. Regretfully forcing a leadership election will I think be largely tolerated. Public grandstanding like Watson pretending to be party leader at PMQs is another matter and would IMO be seen as the plotters trying to preempt the members' decision.RochdalePioneers said:Two factions in my party - Progress and Momentum. Progress try and pretend that its still 2005 but at least they turn out and are active campaigners. Momentum try and pretend that its still 1945, but instead of doing any actual work spend too much time holding impromptu demonstrations and passing pointless resolutions.
Both sides are utterly incapable of recognising the other as the Labour Party. Progress thinks Momentum are trots and crazies. Momentum think anyone not Momentum is a Tory or a closet Tory. One or the other will leave the party in the coming weeks.
The sad thing is they could be great together. Momentum have great ideas and a genuine grasp on where the country has gone wrong and solutions to proffer, but couldn't run the proverbial piss-up in a brewery. Progress have nothing whatsoever left to say of their third way project but are great at organising (as long as they don't get too carried away and have the brewery privatised under a "what works" initiative.
They need each other. Sadly they appear to have decided that oblivion is better - rank arrogance and disdain from both sides. Perhaps a grand political realignment is needed. But not now. Not like this.
And yes, in reply to Tissue Price, there is plenty of time for deselections - nobody has been reselected yet. So far, Corbyn and McDonnell have held Momentum back from going for it, apart from a few fringe groups. But if open war breaks out, then I expect a serious effort. If a snap election is called while the process is still ongoing, the process is then controlled by the NEC, and, curiously, it may all come down to how the NEC elections that are about to be held work out. On paper the centre-left six should win at least 4 and maybe all 6 seats, which would give them a majority. In practice, who knows?0 -
That yougov poll that had party breakdown in terms of leave/remain had labour voters on 37% leave. Seems a tad low to me considering how big the Leave leads were in seats where they weigh the labour vote. Probably closer to 45% than 37%.chestnut said:
Not in this case, Robert.rcs1000 said:
Isn't it Uber rather than the immigrants that are cutting minicab wages?chestnut said:
I have worked in both Newham and Redbridge within the last year and listened to complaints about street drinking, mini-cab drivers having their wages undercut, closed shops on employment, etc.murali_s said:
F*cking immigrants - that's what it was all about - scary times ahead.Sunil_Prasannan said:Labour MPs seem to forget that in a lot of their strongholds outside London (and even a couple within London, like Barking), people voted in droves to LEAVE, and so were more in tune with LABOUR LEAVE than LABOUR REMAIN.
None of it from Tories, Kippers or white people.
And Amazon is destroying High Street jobs everywhere.
The closed shop was someone vociferously complaining that the community had changed and he could no longer find work in his trade because his face did not fit with the newly arrived community. Neither the community nor complainant were white British.
A lot of grievances cross racial lines but some pretend it's only a wwc thing.0 -
Crabb is running for leader.0
-
@SophyRidgeSky: Understand Labour MPs are currently deciding whether to back Tom Watson or Angela Eagle as Corbyn challenger. The other will then stand down0
-
Ruth's in an utterly impossible situation and I don't think she even has the full backing of her party.TGOHF said:
Wait wasn't she the PM in waiting ?Lowlander said:This Scottish Parliamentary debate is fantastic. Ruth is getting utterly eviscerated from all sides. The Tories seem cowed, they're unable to raise even a weak murmur of protest every time a new speaker rips into their leader and their party.
Willie Rennie just got up to speak. If he manages to score against her, then her future is looking quite bleak and the idea of the Tories as a "strong opposition" is holed below the water line.0 -
There must be someone to take on the Vote Leave facebook and twitter - even if it's Boris's bag carrier. I don't blame them for not implementing their 'plan for government' (not being IN government), but I do blame them for putting out nothing positive since the result.GIN1138 said:
They won the referendum and then disbanded?Scott_P said:
They have completely deleted their website. All the lies, gone...Luckyguy1983 said:The absolute crapness of Vote Leave is demonstrated by their total post-Brexit silence on social media.
It's clear which was the real campaign...0 -
The list of seats where UKIP was 15% or less behind the winner.logical_song said:
Could you narrow that down to say 10 or 15% behind first place. I suspect the list would be rather short.Alistair said:UKIPs Top 100 seats to target by Percentage Points behind first place consists of
40 Labour seats plus 52 Conservative seats.
As a Top 50 is 22 Labour and 23 Conservative
Top 100 by absolute votes behind consists of :
42 Labour and 49 Con
As a Top 50 it's 26 Labour and 17 Con
UKIP were second in my constituency, but they were 41% behind.
Boston & Skegness
and
that's it.
So 100% of the seats on the list are Conservative!0 -
I wonder why IDS didn't try to fix this when he was in charge?rcs1000 said:
Hear, hear.MaxPB said:
They are both stupid ideas. Benefits should be payable only to those who have paid into the system for a minimum of 12 out of the last 24 months. Doesn't matter where you're from or what nationality you are. Naturalised, born here, commonwealth citizen, EU citizen. Everyone should get the same bloody treatment, let's just fix the fucking benefits system once and for all. I'm sick of hearing about how British citizens are out competed by EU citizens, until we have a benefits system that incentiveses work and an education system fit for purpose, everything else is just treating the symptoms. Mass immigration is caused by a badly designed benefits system and rubbish education system, let's fix those.not_on_fire said:
So not naturalized British citizens? Great way to divide society even further.0 -
My Scottish friend's sons tried to get a job at a mushroom farm near the village - were rejected because they didn't speak the right language.0
-
I've always thought that. Pixie like.rcs1000 said:
Am I the only one who thinks Yvette is quite... errrr... cute?surbiton said:If Yvette is interested, I'll back her (again). Last time, I put her #1, unenthusiastically. Because both she and Burnham were being so careful as to what to say that they were coming up with "if on the one hand, ......."
I think she will have learnt from that. Plus Brexit has already happened. Representing a Yorkshire seat, she will have far more understanding of the Labour WWC proble.
She is definitely a ready-made package. But she won't get it.0 -
Scott_P said:
This is why Boris has been invisible since Friday
https://twitter.com/petermannionmp/status/747760660130439168
Damning. Hilarious. And absolutely spot on.0 -
Lol - Plato fails to read detail in post shocker. you're going to have to nominate IDS now.PlatoSaid said:
The only way it works is if just British born citizens get auto benefits - everyone else is excluded. Even then, it's The Establishment trying to get around what the populace believed they voted for.SeanT said:
There is also a way for us to square the immigration circle. May (or Boris) should propose, along with joining EEA, that our benefits system becomes contributory, thus ending much of the pull factorSunil_Prasannan said:
Sounds good to me. Sean T should be Tory Leader!SeanT said:
This is the deal the Tories will negotiate, under May (or maybe even Boris).SouthamObserver said:What we are witnessing is the death of the Labour party as a potential party of government. The Labour membership would prefer that to allowing a "Blairite" (ie, anyone who is not Jeremy Corbyn) to be leader. The comfort blanket is too warm, the membership - largely well-off and unaffected personally by Tory policy - too detached from real life. Labour will develop into a full-blown socialist party and will gradually wither away into complete irrelevance. A new centre-left party will take its place. All that, though, will take time.
Unfortunately, what it means is that a right wing Tory government that needs just 37% of the vote to stay in power will negotiate the terms of Brexit largely unscrutinised and unopposed. And that will result in a deal which will hurt ordinary voters and alienate them even further from the political process.
That's how decent Jeremy Corbyn is.
The Norway option, with Free movement and a promise of another vote in ten years.
There aren't enough die-hard anti-migrationists in the Tory party to stop it. Most Tory LEAVERS are in the Hannan camp: Sovereigntists. They will be content with this, the City will be content with this. Labour and UKIP wwc voters will not be content, but the Tories won't care
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eb8dbe8c-3d0c-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/comment/feed//product#axzz4CsSQ3HZ4
This would also be popular with quite a lot of voters, in itself.
It does politicians no favours to subvert what the people decided. Sovereignty and control are inimical with FoM. 0 -
Willie Rennie "Ruth Davidson is not defending the Union, she is undermining it".
When even Willie Rennie is scoring point after point against you, your future is looking bleak. "Defending the Union" is Ruth's entire platform. The Scottish Tory surge has met its gotterdamerung.0 -
She is a fine figure of a lass.Barnesian said:
I've always thought that. Pixie like.rcs1000 said:
Am I the only one who thinks Yvette is quite... errrr... cute?surbiton said:If Yvette is interested, I'll back her (again). Last time, I put her #1, unenthusiastically. Because both she and Burnham were being so careful as to what to say that they were coming up with "if on the one hand, ......."
I think she will have learnt from that. Plus Brexit has already happened. Representing a Yorkshire seat, she will have far more understanding of the Labour WWC proble.
She is definitely a ready-made package. But she won't get it.0 -
I heard that he tried, but Lib Dems blocked a contributory principle to benefits, the idea wasn't revisited.williamglenn said:
I wonder why IDS didn't try to fix this when he was in charge?rcs1000 said:
Hear, hear.MaxPB said:
They are both stupid ideas. Benefits should be payable only to those who have paid into the system for a minimum of 12 out of the last 24 months. Doesn't matter where you're from or what nationality you are. Naturalised, born here, commonwealth citizen, EU citizen. Everyone should get the same bloody treatment, let's just fix the fucking benefits system once and for all. I'm sick of hearing about how British citizens are out competed by EU citizens, until we have a benefits system that incentiveses work and an education system fit for purpose, everything else is just treating the symptoms. Mass immigration is caused by a badly designed benefits system and rubbish education system, let's fix those.not_on_fire said:
So not naturalized British citizens? Great way to divide society even further.0 -
I can only assume you must have a live betting slip with her name on itRichard_Nabavi said:
Well, yes, she was. Beggars can't be choosers, though. At least she's credible and grown-up.SquareRoot said:
..errr.. were you on holiday at the last leader hustings. she was awful.. .Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well she's the obvious choice, an oven-ready, Corbyn-untainted PM-in-waiting who could match Theresa May for seriousness and make Boris look like a smirking schoolboy.RodCrosby said:
Yvette has also been on manoeuvres this morning...volcanopete said:R4 Wato stating Dan Jarvis has ruled himself out which leaves Eagle and Watson to fight it out for contender against Corbyn.Eagle is still the value bet but the price keeps contracting.25s will do me.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/yvette-cooper-calls-jeremy-corbyn-8301464
Labour would be out of their minds not to choose her as Corbyn's replacement. So it won't be her, I guess.0 -
Cheers Nick - wasn't sure how it worked if there was a snap election. Could be very interesting.NickPalmer said:And yes, in reply to Tissue Price, there is plenty of time for deselections - nobody has been reselected yet. So far, Corbyn and McDonnell have held Momentum back from going for it, apart from a few fringe groups. But if open war breaks out, then I expect a serious effort. If a snap election is called while the process is still ongoing, the process is then controlled by the NEC, and, curiously, it may all come down to how the NEC elections that are about to be held work out. On paper the centre-left six should win at least 4 and maybe all 6 seats, which would give them a majority. In practice, who knows?
PS "if open war breaks out"? What's this then?
0 -
Very hard to disagree with that. I recall lamenting the lack of commitment to a single objective during the campaign.rcs1000 said:
It's not economically impossible. But this is why we needed to have a destination in mind before we voted.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.0 -
If we stay in the EEA we can limit migration via safeguard measures under Article 112. This can be done for years.0
-
No we can't.ManWithThePlan said:If we stay in the EEA we can limit migration via safeguard measures under Article 112. This can be done for years.
0 -
Pickles!!Scott_P said:
Who ate all the pies?YellowSubmarine said:If the answer is Watson what is the question ?
0 -
Switzerland is being booted out next week IIRCMP_SE said:
Strong grasp of the Norway model.....Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.0 -
No, I'm just giving friendly, unbiased advice to my Labour friends.SquareRoot said:I can only assume you must have a live betting slip with her name on it
0 -
It's very rich to talk about grandstanding Nick when Corbyn is trying to hold on despite losing a NCV by a landslide.NickPalmer said:
Yes, there's a lot in that, although I also know a lot of people in between who are simply party loyalists who wish the rival factions would STFU. There is VERY little sympathy for the people who have been destabilising the party from day 1, but equally even on the left there is some palpable doubt. What happens now will influence the leadership election and subsequent evevents. Regretfully forcing a leadership election will I think be largely tolerated. Public grandstanding like Watson pretending to be party leader at PMQs is another matter and would IMO be seen as the plotters trying to preempt the members' decision.RochdalePioneers said:Two factions in my party - Progress and Momentum. Progress try and pretend that its still 2005 but at least they turn out and are active campaigners. Momentum try and pretend that its still 1945, but instead of doing any actual work spend too much time holding impromptu demonstrations and passing pointless resolutions.
Both sides are utterly incapable of recognising the other as the Labour Party. Progress thinks Momentum are trots and crazies. Momentum think anyone not Momentum is a Tory or a closet Tory. One or the other will leave the party in the coming weeks.
The sad thing is they could be great together. Momentum have great ideas and a genuine grasp on where the country has gone wrong and solutions to proffer, but couldn't run the proverbial piss-up in a brewery. Progress have nothing whatsoever left to say of their third way project but are great at organising (as long as they don't get too carried away and have the brewery privatised under a "what works" initiative.
They need each other. Sadly they appear to have decided that oblivion is better - rank arrogance and disdain from both sides. Perhaps a grand political realignment is needed. But not now. Not like this.
And yes, in reply to Tissue Price, there is plenty of time for deselections - nobody has been reselected yet. So far, Corbyn and McDonnell have held Momentum back from going for it, apart from a few fringe groups. But if open war breaks out, then I expect a serious effort. If a snap election is called while the process is still ongoing, the process is then controlled by the NEC, and, curiously, it may all come down to how the NEC elections that are about to be held work out. On paper the centre-left six should win at least 4 and maybe all 6 seats, which would give them a majority. In practice, who knows?
If that isn't grandstanding, I don't know what is.0 -
All Corbyn had to do was to speak with passion in favour of "remain". Maybe he cannot.
I wonder how he voted.
P/S my spell checker recommends "corncob" for "Corbyn".0 -
Oh no! Priti looks like she'd smile devilishly at you, Yvette would tut if you didn't fold your trousers first.Barnesian said:
I've always thought that. Pixie like.rcs1000 said:
Am I the only one who thinks Yvette is quite... errrr... cute?surbiton said:If Yvette is interested, I'll back her (again). Last time, I put her #1, unenthusiastically. Because both she and Burnham were being so careful as to what to say that they were coming up with "if on the one hand, ......."
I think she will have learnt from that. Plus Brexit has already happened. Representing a Yorkshire seat, she will have far more understanding of the Labour WWC proble.
She is definitely a ready-made package. But she won't get it.0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
Welcome to pb.com, Mr. Plan 0 -
Won't the Scottish Tories have a lot of overlap with the 55% and the 38% in Scotland. Those two groups must have a well aligned Venn diagram. I don't think it is terminal, you can't have a country where 38% of people have no representation.Lowlander said:
Ruth's in an utterly impossible situation and I don't think she even has the full backing of her party.TGOHF said:
Wait wasn't she the PM in waiting ?Lowlander said:This Scottish Parliamentary debate is fantastic. Ruth is getting utterly eviscerated from all sides. The Tories seem cowed, they're unable to raise even a weak murmur of protest every time a new speaker rips into their leader and their party.
Willie Rennie just got up to speak. If he manages to score against her, then her future is looking quite bleak and the idea of the Tories as a "strong opposition" is holed below the water line.0 -
What do you mean by 'we'? Very little point any of us having a single destination in mind when none of us are running the country.DavidL said:
Very hard to disagree with that. I recall lamenting the lack of commitment to a single objective during the campaign.rcs1000 said:
It's not economically impossible. But this is why we needed to have a destination in mind before we voted.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.0 -
They have also refused to implement directives in postal services and railways.Chelyabinsk said:
Reading Flexcit/The Market Solution might cheer you up. It makes EFTA membership step one of a phased process by which we reorient our global trade policy and rebuild the Single Market under UNECE supervision. By focusing on smaller scope, flexible bilateral trade and regulatory agreements, we construct an economy where the EU matters less and less.MarkHopkins said:
I don't know why we bothered to vote Leave. If it is economically impossible to leave the EU, then we have already lost our sovereignty.
However, Norway did veto EU oil regulation on these grounds that they weren't actually single market regulations.anotherDave said:
The danger is that wider legislation gets labelled single market.Richard_Tyndall said:
The contribution would be far smaller than we pay now - both Robert Smithson and I using EFTA's own calculations came up with a total UK contribution of around £2 billion gross compared to £15 billion gross at the moment.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.
The amount of EU legislation that applies to the single market is less than 10% of what we are subjected to now.0 -
Any deal we do with the EU will be customised to the UK. Just as we negotiated opt outs over integration in the past.JonathanD said:
No we can't.ManWithThePlan said:If we stay in the EEA we can limit migration via safeguard measures under Article 112. This can be done for years.
0 -
How could we or why can't we? Details are far more useful than a pantomine oh yes we can, oh no you can't discussionJonathanD said:
No we can't.ManWithThePlan said:If we stay in the EEA we can limit migration via safeguard measures under Article 112. This can be done for years.
0 -
List of seats where the SNP were within 15% of Labour pre-GE 2015:Alistair said:
The list of seats where UKIP was 15% or less behind the winner.logical_song said:
Could you narrow that down to say 10 or 15% behind first place. I suspect the list would be rather short.Alistair said:UKIPs Top 100 seats to target by Percentage Points behind first place consists of
40 Labour seats plus 52 Conservative seats.
As a Top 50 is 22 Labour and 23 Conservative
Top 100 by absolute votes behind consists of :
42 Labour and 49 Con
As a Top 50 it's 26 Labour and 17 Con
UKIP were second in my constituency, but they were 41% behind.
Boston & Skegness
and
that's it.
So 100% of the seats on the list are Conservative!
Ochil & Perthshire South0 -
Not possible as the EFTA countries have a veto on that. Nothing can be added to the EEA agreement without explicit agreement from the EFTA countries. This is not a case of an internal body reinterpreting rules but of an external treaty that has to be agreed by both sides.anotherDave said:
The danger is that wider legislation gets labelled single market.Richard_Tyndall said:
The contribution would be far smaller than we pay now - both Robert Smithson and I using EFTA's own calculations came up with a total UK contribution of around £2 billion gross compared to £15 billion gross at the moment.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.
The amount of EU legislation that applies to the single market is less than 10% of what we are subjected to now.
I think that's how the EU got round our social policy opt out.0 -
@Lowlander
'This Scottish Parliamentary debate is fantastic.'
The SNP just need three things,get their independence,find a new currency & cut their £ 8 billion deficit to meet mandatory EU rules for joining the Euro.
I guess the debate is Sturgeon grandstanding.0 -
And nearer to civilisation, of course.rcs1000 said:
Better Cheese, better skiing, better wine.Fishing said:
It also means having to obey every EU single market directive, no matter how idiotic, and having no say in how they are made, doesn't it? Also making massive annual contributions. I can't see it working in the medium term, though it would undoubtedly calm industry and finance in the short term.shiney2 said:Norway means Open Borders. Munchau rarely (ever?) considers/sees a problem there. Some party will have to sell it to the People at an election/ref. Good luck with that.
I think Switzerland is better than Norway, though hardly perfect.0 -
The rural Leave may well help the Tories but the urban, WWC Leave will never help them. Ruth was a punching bag in Holyrood today, she's just there to take shots from everyone else and isn't coming out of it looking very good at all.MaxPB said:
Won't the Scottish Tories have a lot of overlap with the 55% and the 38% in Scotland. Those two groups must have a well aligned Venn diagram. I don't think it is terminal, you can't have a country where 38% of people have no representation.Lowlander said:
Ruth's in an utterly impossible situation and I don't think she even has the full backing of her party.TGOHF said:
Wait wasn't she the PM in waiting ?Lowlander said:This Scottish Parliamentary debate is fantastic. Ruth is getting utterly eviscerated from all sides. The Tories seem cowed, they're unable to raise even a weak murmur of protest every time a new speaker rips into their leader and their party.
Willie Rennie just got up to speak. If he manages to score against her, then her future is looking quite bleak and the idea of the Tories as a "strong opposition" is holed below the water line.0 -
We could do it unilaterally on a temporary basis, to make that permanent we'd need agreement from the EU and other EEA nations. Switzerland are probably going to get something similar in a few months time.JonathanD said:
No we can't.ManWithThePlan said:If we stay in the EEA we can limit migration via safeguard measures under Article 112. This can be done for years.
0 -
So if the Uk is a net contributor - which countries will see their handouts cut the most- or will it be equally across the board ?0
-
Newham ? Bangladeshis ?chestnut said:
Not in this case, Robert.rcs1000 said:
Isn't it Uber rather than the immigrants that are cutting minicab wages?chestnut said:
I have worked in both Newham and Redbridge within the last year and listened to complaints about street drinking, mini-cab drivers having their wages undercut, closed shops on employment, etc.murali_s said:
F*cking immigrants - that's what it was all about - scary times ahead.Sunil_Prasannan said:Labour MPs seem to forget that in a lot of their strongholds outside London (and even a couple within London, like Barking), people voted in droves to LEAVE, and so were more in tune with LABOUR LEAVE than LABOUR REMAIN.
None of it from Tories, Kippers or white people.
And Amazon is destroying High Street jobs everywhere.
The closed shop was someone vociferously complaining that the community had changed and he could no longer find work in his trade because his face did not fit with the newly arrived community. Neither the community nor complainant were white British.
A lot of grievances cross racial lines but some pretend it's only a wwc thing.0 -
Anushka Asthana [edit - guardian Journo]
MPs are suggesting Angela Eagle is piling up nominations for the Labour leadership contest we’re expecting. Sources also say that there has been a high turnout for the no confidence ballot and that they expect an overwhelming result.0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
