politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Alastair Meeks on the political and economic crises of bre
Comments
-
I agree Jonathon .Jonathan said:
Well thanks to Corbyn said party won't exist much longer, then we'll all be afraid. Well done JC you let your ego break Labour.bigjohnowls said:
PLP provoked the crisis it was clearly planned but didnt reckon on Corbyns loyalty to members.Jonathan said:
No need to be rude. Responsibility is the price of leadership. This is Corbyns Labour, the blame is his and no-one else's.bigjohnowls said:
Didnt say they were. Apportioning the blame on JC is cretinousJonathan said:bigjohnowls said:
I agree with your sentance but think the word Corbyn should be replaced by PLPJonathan said:
Because of Corbyns actions, the future is bleak for Labour however it plays out. It will be a miracle if Labour can pull it back.SandyRentool said:
But would you now vote Anyone But Corbyn?bigjohnowls said:
Well if AB could be persuaded to run he would have best chance.Sandpit said:
LOL - so just a cosy cup of early evening tea while watching the cricket then? Not a single backbone between the lot of them!TheScreamingEagles said:@iainjwatson: Andy Burnham hasn't asked Jeremy Corbyn to resign and isn't at this stage resigning himself
Are you sat down
I would vote for him this time to save the party
I have reached Anyone Decent territory, regardless of left-right position - but I don't rate Eagle as Decent.
You are wrong, no one man is more important than the party and the 9 million voters who depend on it.
AE is proof they have completely fooked up here putting Lab into what is likely to be terminal decline.
They were desperate to avoid the democracy of Labs system and thought that a coup would be accepted.
Completely unacceptable in a democratic socialist party i am afraid
To believe that one man can destroy the Labour Party is really sad.
Surely he could negotiate that someone like Clive Lewis was on the ballot to be leader.
So there was a vote on policies not just on him.
This has to be more than just about Corbyn.
He has become a selfish arrogant man , whatever they say about his polite quiet decency.0 -
Interesting if so. Now why couldn't Richard, who has had a copy of the EEA Agreement under his bed since he was twelve years old, tell me that?MaxPB said:
I believe it is possible to unilaterally take up any vetoed regulations or legislation and the EU would consider it settled.TOPPING said:
Here's an expert on the matter:Richard_Tyndall said:
The current EFTA members have a veto over us joining EFTA. That I have said all along. No one anywhere has denied that. Of course the fact that they are already saying they would welcome us is something that seems to have passed you by.TOPPING said:
Stop diverting, Richard. This is what the EEA agreement is:Richard_Tyndall said:
Um. No. They woulTOPPING said:
Thank you.
So the answer is yes: Norway and Liechtenstein and Iceland each would have a veto over our access to the single market if we are EEA members.
Oh, but they've neve EEA route.
Article 102, paragraphs 3-6 are the ones you are after, Richard.
If there is no agreement on an issue within the "Contracting Parties" (ie EU + EEA states) then the issue is suspended.
But you yourself agreed they have the power of veto but have never used it. Apart from Norway, as you say.
i fucking e, other EEA members have a veto over our access to the single market.
If we join EFTA they have no veto over our membership of the EEA because we are already in.
You really do seem to be getting desperate to make something an issue where none exists.
Edit: And please don't bother quoting bits of the EEA Agreement at me as if it is something new. I doubt you had even seen a copy of it before this week whereas I have been studying it and quoting it for the last decade.
"All EFTA members have a veto over the expansion of the EEA agreement (hence the Norwegian refusal to allow it to include oil and gas legislation)"
You said that Richard.
All EFTA members but only three (soon to be four?) who care about the EEA Agreement - Norway (the example you cited), Liechtenstein, and Iceland.
So if any of those non-EU EEA/EFTA members object to an expansion of the EEA Agreement which would otherwise benefit the UK, they would veto it.
And vice versa.
So much time studying the agreement..so little understanding.
Actually you do of course understand it as you gave me the example of Norway using the veto. It's just that you are in denial about it. You should try to lose the blog/chatroom mentality where you insult people and refuse to accept a point. It does you no favours.
Any link?0 -
When are we expecting him to show his hand?Jobabob said:
I would have thought that would be obvious.Wanderer said:
For crying out loud. Whyyyyyy????Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Spoken to several Labour MPs. Told very strong feeling in PLP that no one should declare tomorrow. Confirmed Owen Smith taking soundings.
I know these people are totally fking useless but some of us have MONEY ON THIS FFS!
They are awaiting the decision of Chuckie Falconer.0 -
These guys really cannot inspire confidence surely have the nerve to have no confidence in the leader at a time like this and have no clue what to do next.Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Spoken to several Labour MPs. Told very strong feeling in PLP that no one should declare tomorrow. Confirmed Owen Smith taking soundings.
I know these people are totally fking useless but some of us have MONEY ON THIS FFS!
Completely incompetent.
Its not as though Lab has changed the system and somehow wrong footed them.
Incompetent fools cant think beyond ABC but then realise nobodys called that
We will end up with Liz Kendall as the challenger at this rate.
0 -
fixed it for yabigjohnowls said:
Betting is on a mugs game!!Pulpstar said:
FUCK OFFWanderer said:
She may have landed againJobabob said:
The Eagle has flownScrapheap_as_was said:woman problem averted, betting is a joke on this
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2m2 minutes ago
Shadow Cabinet source: Owen Smith thinking of running for leadership. Met with Eagle. Eagle will not now declare.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/7482476371371663360 -
Boris has always struck me as either someone who really is that clever and devious but hides it will beneath a bluff, daft exterior or as someone who is that stupid but won a prize for scripture knowledge at school, was friends with the right boys and has been winging since he was 21.
I really don't think that finding out which man he is would be best when was head of the UK government.
This leaves us with May, a solid placeholder who has been in the crappiest department in government for the last six years and seen off every challenger to her quite easily.
Will she inspire the country to great heights; no.
Will she make us look like clown shoes; no.
Right now we need that, and I've thought so for some time. I would have backed Boris in 2019 if he had taken his time to shine in some cabinet job and proved himself, but he hasn't yet and has more skeletons in his closet than Ed Gein.0 -
Thank you. It's good that it won't apply in the EEA then.Charles said:
Are there any others? This is a real question. What are the changes in national law which will happen as a result of EU derived legislation bring repealed? It's that uncertainty point.
0 -
Exactly right. This is no time for narrow party political advantage (Fox, Baron).Wanderer said:
May has been the Conservatives' best choice since Cameron said he was standing down. What's changed is that now every sensible person wants the Conservatives to make the best choice, regardless of which party they support, because the stakes are so high for all of us.Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.0 -
bigjohnowls said:
These guys really cannot inspire confidence surely have the nerve to have no confidence in the leader at a time like this and have no clue what to do next.Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Spoken to several Labour MPs. Told very strong feeling in PLP that no one should declare tomorrow. Confirmed Owen Smith taking soundings.
I know these people are totally fking useless but some of us have MONEY ON THIS FFS!
Completely incompetent.
Its not as though Lab has changed the system and somehow wrong footed them.
Incompetent fools cant think beyond ABC but then realise nobodys called that
We will end up with Liz Kendall as the challenger at this rate.0 -
Yes - However where are the downsized properties? That is the problem with the Bedroom tax. For people to move there must be a ready supply.John_M said:
That only applies to social housing right? If so, not a supporter. My downsizing measure would only apply to homeowners. Got to get older people moving.weejonnie said:
Ah - a supporter of the bedroom tax then.John_M said:
While I'm feeling mellow and optimistic, if we do use our tough times to drive through reforms that we've been too fat, dumb and happy to attempt before, that would be rather lovely. Not likely given our current batch of political pygmies.SeanT said:
Sure, but the UK recovered equally quickly under Thatcherism. It was just seven years from the Winter of Discontent to us becoming the fastest growing nation in Europe.MaxPB said:
It's generally easier for smaller nations to recover than larger ones because policy changes have an almost immediate effect.SeanT said:
Yes, we are definitely going to take a hit. And it won't be pretty. Question is, how big.matt said:@John_M....
I think that's a pragmatic way of looking at it. All I would add is when I said that in April that potential deal flow was down, I was told look at PMIs, everything's fine. I know of a number of deals that were pulled on Friday. It's easy to dismiss these as froth and not the real economy and I'd concede that there's a point there. But these are confidence straws in the wind.
Equally, financial institutions (and I use that in the widest sense of the phrase) are making relocation plans. .. It subsidises the country financially, if not perhaps morally. Choices have consequences.
Ten years of misery with an economy shrivelled by 15%? Not worth it.
Three years of stagnancy followed a bounceback, trend growth up, and the fecking EU question finally settled - Worth it.
As I've said before, Iceland is a fascinating example of how a shattered economy can quickly recover. Right now it has 3.5% GDP growth, 4% unemployment, and its GDP per capita has overtaken ours again, returning to trend.
If we can boast similar stats in eight years we'll have made the right choice. IF.
If I ruled the world, the Triple lock would be gone, wealthy pensioners would forfeit the state pension and all other benefits (probably only save three and fourpence, but it would show willing) and there'd be carrot AND stick to get people to downsize. That would only be the start of my Reign of Terror.0 -
Not really, as long as she says she would lead the UK out of the EU and trigger article 50 as soon as she has an outline of the deal ready it won't be a problem. The party would destroy her if she rowed back on leaving.numbertwelve said:
Mays biggest challenge is squaring the circle between backing remain and being a Brexit PM.Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.
I have no doubt she'll have come up with an explanation/argument. The challenge will be whether the Eurosceptic membership accepts it.
That's not a criticism, it's a comment. Her whole candidacy succeeds or falls on getting that tone right.0 -
Excellent Alastair. Particularly appreciated the Death from Pratchett reference. One of my favourite characters.0
-
I agree absolutely. But crap as bits of it undoubtedly are, I think it is misplaced to say it hinders competition. Everyone after all is in the same boat. Clumsy as it is, it was formed (lest we forget with a kickstart from CP176 all those years ago) essentially to protect consumers from the likes of you. And me.Charles said:
Bits of it are good. Bits of it are crap.TOPPING said:
All of it written by people who don't understand (or care about the City), despite Kay's best efforts to get the EU to see sense.
No shame here.0 -
TSE might not mind...bigjohnowls said:
These guys really cannot inspire confidence surely have the nerve to have no confidence in the leader at a time like this and have no clue what to do next.Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Spoken to several Labour MPs. Told very strong feeling in PLP that no one should declare tomorrow. Confirmed Owen Smith taking soundings.
I know these people are totally fking useless but some of us have MONEY ON THIS FFS!
Completely incompetent.
Its not as though Lab has changed the system and somehow wrong footed them.
Incompetent fools cant think beyond ABC but then realise nobodys called that
We will end up with Liz Kendall as the challenger at this rate.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/liz-kendall-posed-tank-now-80086140 -
slightly off topic. - I was thinking about the pre referendum predictions on turnout - the consensus seemed to be sub-60% meant leave, 60-75% meant remain, and above 75% meant leave. I don't think anyone was saying leave on 72% turnout - any theories on why we saw decently but not massively elevated turnout from GE yet a leave vote?0
-
What tends to get overlooked is how well manufacturing did under Thatcher and Major. Manufacturing output rose 44% from 1979-97. De-industrialisation took place after 2000.foxinsoxuk said:
Though it was the Thatcher years that accelerated the already existing trend of deindustrialisation. The concentration on London and the South East and financial services in particular is how the economy recovered, with post industrial areas becoming backwaters. They have just had their revenge by voting Leave to bugger the bankers and the Metropolis. They may even be about to elect the former Mayor of the city to preside over its demise.SeanT said:
Sure, but the UK recovered equally quickly under Thatcherism. It was just seven years from the Winter of Discontent to us becoming the fastest growing nation in Europe.MaxPB said:
It's generally easier for smaller nations to recover than larger ones because policy changes have an almost immediate effect.SeanT said:
Yes, we are definitely going to take a hit. And it won't be pretty. Question is, how big.matt said:@John_M....
I think that's a pragmatic way of looking at it. All I would add is when I said that in April that potential deal flow was down, I was told look at PMIs, everything's fine. I know of a number of deals that were pulled on Friday. It's easy to dismiss these as froth and not the real economy and I'd concede that there's a point there. But these are confidence straws in the wind.
Equally, financial institutions (and nd decided to take a giant pace forward. Let's hope there's a parachute. And that someone's willing to pull the ripcord because base jumping kills....
Ten years of misery with an economy permanently shrivelled by 15%? Not worth it.
Three years of stagnancy followed a bounceback, trend growth up, and the fecking EU question finally settled - Worth it.
As I've said before, Iceland is a fascinating example of how a shattered economy can quickly recover. Right now it has 3.5% GDP growth, 4% unemployment, and its GDP per capita has overtaken ours again, returning to trend.
If we can boast similar stats in eight years we'll have made the right choice. IF.
Be careful who you are nasty to on the way up, you are certain to meet them again on the way down.0 -
He did - much earlier in the conversationTOPPING said:
Interesting if so. Now why couldn't Richard, who has had a copy of the EEA Agreement under his bed since he was twelve years old, tell me that?MaxPB said:
I believe it is possible to unilaterally take up any vetoed regulations or legislation and the EU would consider it settled.TOPPING said:
Here's an expert on the matter:Richard_Tyndall said:
The current EFTA members have a veto over us joining EFTA. That I have said all along. No one anywhere has denied that. Of course the fact that they are already saying they would welcome us is something that seems to have passed you by.TOPPING said:
Stop diverting, Richard. This is what the EEA agreement is:Richard_Tyndall said:
Um. No. They woulTOPPING said:
Thank you.
So the answer is yes: Norway and Liechtenstein and Iceland each would have a veto over our access to the single market if we are EEA members.
Oh, but they've neve EEA route.
Article 102, paragraphs 3-6 are the ones you are after, Richard.
If there is no agreement on an issue within the "Contracting Parties" (ie EU + EEA states) then the issue is suspended.
But you yourself agreed they have the power of veto but have never used it. Apart from Norway, as you say.
i fucking e, other EEA members have a veto over our access to the single market.
If we join EFTA they have no veto over our membership of the EEA because we are already in.
You really do seem to be getting desperate to make something an issue where none exists.
Edit: And please don't bother quoting bits of the EEA Agreement at me as if it is something new. I doubt you had even seen a copy of it before this week whereas I have been studying it and quoting it for the last decade.
"All EFTA members have a veto over the expansion of the EEA agreement (hence the Norwegian refusal to allow it to include oil and gas legislation)"
You said that Richard.
All EFTA members but only three (soon to be four?) who care about the EEA Agreement - Norway (the example you cited), Liechtenstein, and Iceland.
So if any of those non-EU EEA/EFTA members object to an expansion of the EEA Agreement which would otherwise benefit the UK, they would veto it.
And vice versa.
So much time studying the agreement..so little understanding.
Actually you do of course understand it as you gave me the example of Norway using the veto. It's just that you are in denial about it. You should try to lose the blog/chatroom mentality where you insult people and refuse to accept a point. It does you no favours.
Any link?0 -
People thought the young would be enthused before the WWC.Paristonda said:slightly off topic. - I was thinking about the pre referendum predictions on turnout - the consensus seemed to be sub-60% meant leave, 60-75% meant remain, and above 75% meant leave. I don't think anyone was saying leave on 72% turnout - any theories on why we saw decently but not massively elevated turnout from GE yet a leave vote?
0 -
No it wouldn't be their interest for now - but another alliance would help in a GE for sureIanB2 said:
I doubt the LibDems would welcome a bunch of authoritarian centralising Tory-light machine politicians from Labour's right wing. It took the Liberals years to absorb the last lot.CopperSulphate said:
It would just be current Labour minus 30% of their voters and also the brand name which is one of their main assets. I guess they'd gain 8 Lib Dem MPs.Patrick said:If, as now seems entirely likely, Labour splits to become Labour (hard left nutjobs) and Another Party (with the MPs and voters) I view the Another Party as being all but indistinguishable from the LibDems. Might these folk simply cross the floor and create a moderate centre left union, essentially reuniting the SDP and 'real' / non-loony Labour? That might give the Tories a serious run for their money.
0 -
BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???0
-
And has been sacked twice, once for falsifying a quote and once for lying about an affair in public. To his boss.taffys said:''Mays biggest challenge is squaring the circle between backing remain and being a Brexit PM.''
Boris has won two elections and one referendum on pretty unpromising ground and always against the odds.
May has won nothing, ever.0 -
She also did pretty damn well with non-EU migrants, cutting them by a third, but mainly among the low skilled.SeanT said:
Absolutely impossible target set by Cameron at his most casually irresponsible.SandyRentool said:
Her number 1 priority at the Home Office was to get net migration down to the tens of thousands. How did she do?SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.0 -
Have spent today Laying the Eagle.
Fly Eagle Fly!0 -
The other thing, while we are on the subject of MiFID, god help us, is that as you say, it was written by people who might not have had a great understanding of the City (or by those in the City who lobbied most strongly, as Kay never failed to point out), but who had a great understanding of what their constituents wanted. Which, in short, was bankers' heads on a plate.Charles said:
Bits of it are good. Bits of it are crap.TOPPING said:
All of it written by people who don't understand (or care about the City), despite Kay's best efforts to get the EU to see sense.
No shame here.
Post-GFC, politicians were taking their lead from Main St, not Wall St (another reason I don't think it is a good example of the EU being anti-democratic).0 -
I remember the days not so long ago when an England team would have been despairing of getting 308 off 50 overs. Now off 42 it's a dawdle. This is some batting lineup.0
-
I think I am going to go and watch some old episodes of the Thick of It, to remind we of times less ridiculous behavior by politicians.0
-
The postman has gone postal... especially his last few paras
https://twitter.com/OliverKamm/status/7482531787564974080 -
Eagle soaring...
(on BF)0 -
What a great week for England and Roy if you don't follow footballDavidL said:I remember the days not so long ago when an England team would have been despairing of getting 308 off 50 overs. Now off 42 it's a dawdle. This is some batting lineup.
0 -
To say the game has changed is no understatement. 100 of the last 10 is just the norm.DavidL said:I remember the days not so long ago when an England team would have been despairing of getting 308 off 50 overs. Now off 42 it's a dawdle. This is some batting lineup.
0 -
But she took the job and failed to deliver it. Yes she was hampered by Osborne and others but we would not see Thatcher preside over that scale of failure.SeanT said:
Absolutely impossible target set by Cameron at his most casually irresponsible.SandyRentool said:
Her number 1 priority at the Home Office was to get net migration down to the tens of thousands. How did she do?SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
0 -
Surprising he's announcing it now though - would have been good leverage in negotiations. That tells me the EU is serious about its no negotiating\special treatment stand, so no need to hold that card to his chest. They will offer standard EEA or Nothing at all, no negotiations.RobD said:More scaremongering debunked:
"French President Francois Hollande has said that Britain's vote to leave the EU should not affect a deal to stop migrants crossing the Channel, which led to many being stuck at camps in Calais."0 -
MI5, I guess....alex. said:BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???
0 -
The problem is that regulations are specific to each industry, so not many people can give you multiple examples.matt said:
Thank you. It's good that it won't apply in the EEA then.Charles said:
Are there any others? This is a real question. What are the changes in national law which will happen as a result of EU derived legislation bring repealed? It's that uncertainty point.
However, looking at lifesciences and financial services (the two sectors I know best) what you consistently see is the multinationals lobbying at the Brussels level for higher and more complex regulations. This is because it creates a barrier to entry as well as a raising fixed costs for all market participants - thus creating a relative competitive advantage for the bigger players.
Of course this will still happen at the national level, but the SMEs will have a better chance to interact with their national ministers on an even footing to the MNCs.
I think that it's a reasonable assumption that MNCs behave the same in other industries.0 -
Nope... I'm hearing Charlie Falconer is in the frame for doing the dirty.MarqueeMark said:
MI5, I guess....alex. said:BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???
0 -
All of the sensible candidates will stand up there and say they'll invoke Article 50 and leave the EU. The people have spoken and the writing is on the wall. That is not a huge hurdle to overcome.MaxPB said:
Not really, as long as she says she would lead the UK out of the EU and trigger article 50 as soon as she has an outline of the deal ready it won't be a problem. The party would destroy her if she rowed back on leaving.numbertwelve said:
Mays biggest challenge is squaring the circle between backing remain and being a Brexit PM.Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.
I have no doubt she'll have come up with an explanation/argument. The challenge will be whether the Eurosceptic membership accepts it.
That's not a criticism, it's a comment. Her whole candidacy succeeds or falls on getting that tone right.
The successful candidate will persuade the membership that they will go to Europe and get a good deal for Britain. To convince people, a remain backer is going to come under much more scrutiny in that respect. It will be the question on every interviewers lips: "why are you the best person to lead us out given your past position?" I'm not saying this can't be done, nor that May won't manage it. I'm simply saying that she will have to be clever in her positioning and tone on the subject. She will be challenged on it. She's a savvy operator but that is the biggest problem for her, just as Boris' biggest problem is the perception of some of a lack of credibility/competence.0 -
I don't want to do the homework, so colour me lazy. I've just noted that in my immediate social circle there are 14 people with c. 46 bedrooms between 'em. All empty nesters, bar me.weejonnie said:
Yes - However where are the downsized properties? That is the problem with the Bedroom tax. For people to move there must be a ready supply.John_M said:
That only applies to social housing right? If so, not a supporter. My downsizing measure would only apply to homeowners. Got to get older people moving.weejonnie said:
Ah - a supporter of the bedroom tax then.John_M said:SeanT said:
Sure, but the UK recovered equally quickly under Thatcherism. It was just seven years from the Winter of Discontent to us becoming the fastest growing nation in Europe.MaxPB said:
It's generally easier for smaller nations to recover than larger ones because policy changes have an almost immediate effect.SeanT said:
Yes, we are definitely going to take a hit. And it won't be pretty. Question is, how big.matt said:@John_M....
I think that's a pragmatic way of looking at it. All I would add is when I said that in April that potential deal flow was down, I was told look at PMIs, everything's fine. I know of a number of deals that were pulled on Friday. It's easy to dismiss these as froth and not the real economy and I'd concede that there's a point there. But these are confidence straws in the wind.
Equally, financial institutions (and I use that in the widest sense of the phrase) are making relocation plans. .. It subsidises the country financially, if not perhaps morally. Choices have consequences.
Ten years of misery with an economy shrivelled by 15%? Not worth it.
Three years of stagnancy followed a bounceback, trend growth up, and the fecking EU question finally settled - Worth it.
As I've said before, Iceland is a fascinating example of how a shattered economy can quickly recover. Right now it has 3.5% GDP growth, 4% unemployment, and its GDP per capita has overtaken ours again, returning to trend.
If we can boast similar stats in eight years we'll have made the right choice. IF.
Council tax is so regressive (Wales had a property revaluation in 2005, so we're less out of kilter than England) that there's no real incentive to move; in fact, it's the other way round, you'd be crazy to move with the house price inflation we've had.0 -
I assumed it was Team Gove adding some pressureMarqueeMark said:
MI5, I guess....alex. said:BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???
0 -
The highest increases came from council estates, in Scotland where the debate was one sided turnout was similar to GE, I.e. middle class more likely to turnout.Paristonda said:slightly off topic. - I was thinking about the pre referendum predictions on turnout - the consensus seemed to be sub-60% meant leave, 60-75% meant remain, and above 75% meant leave. I don't think anyone was saying leave on 72% turnout - any theories on why we saw decently but not massively elevated turnout from GE yet a leave vote?
0 -
to lose
No. We're in the Brexit hangover now, with everyone squeezing their eyeballs and saying, 'Why oh why?'. That level of anti-EU fervour will never be reached again. Most of the Tories will have got it out of their system too, and the call we be to make the most of a bad job whatever it takes.numbertwelve said:
Mays biggest challenge is squaring the circle between backing remain and being a Brexit PM.Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.
I have no doubt she'll have come up with an explanation/argument. The challenge will be whether the Eurosceptic membership accepts it.
That's not a criticism, it's a comment. Her whole candidacy succeeds or falls on getting that tone right.0 -
You remainders are in for a big shock if u think we r just going to go away quietly now.Stark_Dawning said:to lose
No. We're in the Brexit hangover now, with everyone squeezing their eyeballs and saying, 'Why oh why?'. That level of anti-EU fervour will never be reached again. Most of the Tories will have got it out of their system now, and the call we be to make the most of a bad job whatever it takes.numbertwelve said:
Mays biggest challenge is squaring the circle between backing remain and being a Brexit PM.Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.
I have no doubt she'll have come up with an explanation/argument. The challenge will be whether the Eurosceptic membership accepts it.
That's not a criticism, it's a comment. Her whole candidacy succeeds or falls on getting that tone right.0 -
Apparently Wee Dougie has said Corbyn must go0
-
Because I'm not beholden to the leave campaign's bullshit claims like Boris. Most Tories recognise most of it as utter bullshit. As loads of us pointed out at the time, Boris would have to deliver that stupid manifesto, Theresa wouldn't.numbertwelve said:
All of the sensible candidates will stand up there and say they'll invoke Article 50 and leave the EU. The people have spoken and the writing is on the wall. That is not a huge hurdle to overcome.MaxPB said:
Not really, as long as she says she would lead the UK out of the EU and trigger article 50 as soon as she has an outline of the deal ready it won't be a problem. The party would destroy her if she rowed back on leaving.numbertwelve said:
Mays biggest challenge is squaring the circle between backing remain and being a Brexit PM.Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.
I have no doubt she'll have come up with an explanation/argument. The challenge will be whether the Eurosceptic membership accepts it.
That's not a criticism, it's a comment. Her whole candidacy succeeds or falls on getting that tone right.
The successful candidate will persuade the membership that they will go to Europe and get a good deal for Britain. To convince people, a remain backer is going to come under much more scrutiny in that respect. It will be the question on every interviewers lips: "why are you the best person to lead us out given your past position?" I'm not saying this can't be done, nor that May won't manage it. I'm simply saying that she will have to be clever in her positioning and tone on the subject. She will be challenged on it. She's a savvy operator but that is the biggest problem for her, just as Boris' biggest problem is the perception of some of a lack of credibility/competence.0 -
I was thinking about flexibility, rather than competition (e.g. fixed costs vs variable costs)TOPPING said:
I agree absolutely. But crap as bits of it undoubtedly are, I think it is misplaced to say it hinders competition. Everyone after all is in the same boat. Clumsy as it is, it was formed (lest we forget with a kickstart from CP176 all those years ago) essentially to protect consumers from the likes of you. And me.Charles said:
Bits of it are good. Bits of it are crap.TOPPING said:
All of it written by people who don't understand (or care about the City), despite Kay's best efforts to get the EU to see sense.
No shame here.
Although - as I posted subsequently - higher regulatory barriers makes it harder for new market entrants, so it does stifle competition in my view.
As for me, sweet and innocent that I am, I don't deal with retail consumers. And the family's watchword is to treat customers like we would like to be treated ourselves.0 -
That’s a bit rich coming from the head of Labour’s Remain campaign – the guy was invisible.Scrapheap_as_was said:The postman has gone postal... especially his last few paras
https://twitter.com/OliverKamm/status/7482531787564974080 -
The turnout of pensioners was at a record high, the turnout of working class voters in safe seats rose more than was expected, the turnout of younger voters esp 18-24 appears to have been below 50%. Turnout in Scotland and London was good, but not as good as most of the English provinces. Thus turnout rose, but not evenly.nunu said:
The highest increases came from council estates, in Scotland where the debate was one sided turnout was similar to GE, I.e. middle class more likely to turnout.Paristonda said:slightly off topic. - I was thinking about the pre referendum predictions on turnout - the consensus seemed to be sub-60% meant leave, 60-75% meant remain, and above 75% meant leave. I don't think anyone was saying leave on 72% turnout - any theories on why we saw decently but not massively elevated turnout from GE yet a leave vote?
0 -
hmm I'd like to see the link.Charles said:
He did - much earlier in the conversationTOPPING said:
Interesting if so. Now why couldn't Richard, who has had a copy of the EEA Agreement under his bed since he was twelve years old, tell me that?MaxPB said:
I believe it is possible to unilaterally take up any vetoed regulations or legislmation and the EU would consider it settled.TOPPING said:
Here's an expert on the matter:Richard_Tyndall said:
The current EFTA members have a veto over us joining EFTA. That I have said all along. No one anywhere has denied that. Of course the fact that they are already saying they would welcome us is something that seems to have passed you by.TOPPING said:
Stop diverting, Richard. This is what the EEA agreement is:Richard_Tyndall said:
Article 102, paragraphs 3-6 are the ones you are after, Richard.
If there is no agreement on an issue within the "Contracting Parties" (ie EU + EEA states) then the issue is suspended.
But you yourself agreed they have the power of veto but have never used it. Apart from Norway, as you say.
i fucking e, other EEA members have a veto over our access to the single market.
If we join EFTA they have no veto over our membership of the EEA because we are already in.
You really do seem to be getting desperate to make something an issue where none exists.
Edit: And please don't bother quoting bits of the EEA Agreement at me as if it is something new. I doubt you had even seen a copy of it before this week whereas I have been studying it and quoting it for the last decade.
"All EFTA members have a veto over the expansion of the EEA agreement (hence the Norwegian refusal to allow it to include oil and gas legislation)"
You said that Richard.
All EFTA members but only three (soon to be four?) who care about the EEA Agreement - Norway (the example you cited), Liechtenstein, and Iceland.
So if any of those non-EU EEA/EFTA members object to an expansion of the EEA Agreement which would otherwise benefit the UK, they would veto it.
And vice versa.
So much time studying the agreement..so little understanding.
Actually you do of course understand it as you gave me the example of Norway using the veto. It's just that you are in denial about it. You should try to lose the blog/chatroom mentality where you insult people and refuse to accept a point. It does you no favours.
Any link?
Thank goodness he has you as his wing man.0 -
Where Eagles Daren'tRodCrosby said:
Where Eagles Scare.Jobabob said:
The Eagle has flownScrapheap_as_was said:woman problem averted, betting is a joke on this
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2m2 minutes ago
Shadow Cabinet source: Owen Smith thinking of running for leadership. Met with Eagle. Eagle will not now declare.0 -
18-24 was 36.4%.IanB2 said:
The turnout of pensioners was at a record high, the turnout of working class voters in safe seats rose more than was expected, the turnout of younger voters esp 18-24 appears to have been below 50%. Turnout in Scotland and London was good, but not as good as most of the English provinces. Thus turnout rose, but not evenly.nunu said:
The highest increases came from council estates, in Scotland where the debate was one sided turnout was similar to GE, I.e. middle class more likely to turnout.Paristonda said:slightly off topic. - I was thinking about the pre referendum predictions on turnout - the consensus seemed to be sub-60% meant leave, 60-75% meant remain, and above 75% meant leave. I don't think anyone was saying leave on 72% turnout - any theories on why we saw decently but not massively elevated turnout from GE yet a leave vote?
0 -
-
But not the heavy industries that the most Leave areas had. As a percentage of the economy or of workforce the trend has been longterm decline.Sean_F said:
What tends to get overlooked is how well manufacturing did under Thatcher and Major. Manufacturing output rose 44% from 1979-97. De-industrialisation took place after 2000.foxinsoxuk said:
Though it was the Thatcher years that accelerated the already existing trend of deindustrialisation. The concentration on London and the South East and financial services in particular is how the economy recovered, with post industrial areas becoming backwaters. They have just had their revenge by voting Leave to bugger the bankers and the Metropolis. They may even be about to elect the former Mayor of the city to preside over its demise.SeanT said:
Sure, but the UK recovered equally quickly under Thatcherism. It was just seven years from the Winter of Discontent to us becoming the fastest growing nation in Europe.MaxPB said:
It's generally easier for smaller nations to recover than larger ones because policy changes have an almost immediate effect.SeanT said:
Yes, we are definitely going to take a hit. And it won't be pretty. Question is, how big.matt said:@John_M....
I think that's a pragmatic way of looking at it. All I would add is when I said that in April that potential deal flow was down, I was told look at PMIs, everything's fine. I know of a number of deals that were pulled on Friday. It's easy to dismiss these as froth and not the real economy and I'd concede that there's a point there. But these are confidence straws in the wind.
Equally, financial institutions (and nd decided to take a giant pace forward. Let's hope there's a parachute. And that someone's willing to pull the ripcord because base jumping kills....
Ten years of misery with an economy permanently shrivelled by 15%? Not worth it.
Three years of stagnancy followed a bounceback, trend growth up, and the fecking EU question finally settled - Worth it.
As I've said before, Iceland is a fascinating example of how a shattered economy can quickly recover. Right now it has 3.5% GDP growth, 4% unemployment, and its GDP per capita has overtaken ours again, returning to trend.
If we can boast similar stats in eight years we'll have made the right choice. IF.
Be careful who you are nasty to on the way up, you are certain to meet them again on the way down.
These areas had forty years or more of decline, with the quid pro quo being decent subsidies either direct or indirect (such as relocation of civil service jobs) from the rich South East. Now they have bitten the hand that feeds them.0 -
Thanks Charles. I do sometimes get the idea that posters only read what they want to see.Charles said:
He did - much earlier in the conversation0 -
Well he must be busy doing SOMETHING....Scrapheap_as_was said:
Nope... I'm hearing Charlie Falconer is in the frame for doing the dirty.MarqueeMark said:
MI5, I guess....alex. said:BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???
0 -
Some truth in what you say but there's a big difference between "manufacturing" and "industry".Sean_F said:
What tends to get overlooked is how well manufacturing did under Thatcher and Major. Manufacturing output rose 44% from 1979-97. De-industrialisation took place after 2000.foxinsoxuk said:
Though it was the Thatcher years that accelerated the already existing trend of deindustrialisation. The concentration on London and the South East and financial services in particular is how the economy recovered, with post industrial areas becoming backwaters. They have just had their revenge by voting Leave to bugger the bankers and the Metropolis. They may even be about to elect the former Mayor of the city to preside over its demise.SeanT said:
Sure, but the UK recovered equally quickly under Thatcherism. It was just seven years from the Winter of Discontent to us becoming the fastest growing nation in Europe.MaxPB said:
It's generally easier for smaller nations to recover than larger ones because policy changes have an almost immediate effect.SeanT said:
Yes, we are definitely going to take a hit. And it won't be pretty. Question is, how big.matt said:@John_M....
I think that's a pragmatic way of looking at it. All I would add is when I said that in April that potential deal flow was down, I was told look at PMIs, everything's fine. I know of a number of deals that were pulled on Friday. It's easy to dismiss these as froth and not the real economy and I'd concede that there's a point there. But these are confidence straws in the wind.
Equally, financial institutions (and nd decided to take a giant pace forward. Let's hope there's a parachute. And that someone's willing to pull the ripcord because base jumping kills....
Ten years of misery with an economy permanently shrivelled by 15%? Not worth it.
Three years of stagnancy followed a bounceback, trend growth up, and the fecking EU question finally settled - Worth it.
As I've said before, Iceland is a fascinating example of how a shattered economy can quickly recover. Right now it has 3.5% GDP growth, 4% unemployment, and its GDP per capita has overtaken ours again, returning to trend.
If we can boast similar stats in eight years we'll have made the right choice. IF.
Be careful who you are nasty to on the way up, you are certain to meet them again on the way down.0 -
Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too0 -
Scott_P said:
Apparently Wee Dougie has said Corbyn must go
Aaaah, Wee Dougie.... A nation mourns.0 -
0
-
0
-
Me also. Waiting on hustings before deciding.JohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.0 -
She sent it to a third party by mistakePlatoSaid said:
I assumed it was Team Gove adding some pressureMarqueeMark said:
MI5, I guess....alex. said:BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???
0 -
Nick Palmer and BigJohnOwls are clearly pulling for the Tories at the moment. You should give them a vote.JohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.0 -
I think it is a great example of what is wrong with the EU.TOPPING said:
The other thing, while we are on the subject of MiFID, god help us, is that as you say, it was written by people who might not have had a great understanding of the City (or by those in the City who lobbied most strongly, as Kay never failed to point out), but who had a great understanding of what their constituents wanted. Which, in short, was bankers' heads on a plate.Charles said:
Bits of it are good. Bits of it are crap.TOPPING said:
All of it written by people who don't understand (or care about the City), despite Kay's best efforts to get the EU to see sense.
No shame here.
Post-GFC, politicians were taking their lead from Main St, not Wall St (another reason I don't think it is a good example of the EU being anti-democratic).
European MEPs - responding to anger among their local voters as you say - were doing their best to hamstring an industry that didn't operate in their country.
That's not a basis for good governance - it's a basis for rule by emotion.
Far better that a government who has to live with the consequences of their actions makes the rules - they then weigh up the pros and cons of specific moves much more carefully0 -
Quite. They would have got to 400 today off 50 if they had had to. Apparently England has the fastest average scoring rate of any international team since the ODI World Cup.FrancisUrquhart said:
To say the game has changed is no understatement. 100 of the last 10 is just the norm.DavidL said:I remember the days not so long ago when an England team would have been despairing of getting 308 off 50 overs. Now off 42 it's a dawdle. This is some batting lineup.
0 -
RodCrosby said:
He has a point. Why should he listen to those elected by 9,347,324?0 -
Hearty cheer....we shall remain a One Nation party: Con Gain ChesterfieldJonathan said:
Nick Palmer and BigJohnOwls are clearly pulling for the Tories at the moment. You should give them a vote.JohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.0 -
Max - I agree with you completely about Boris and the leave manifesto. It's May's strongest hand.0
-
Engineering Employers Federation asks Art.50 not to be invoked.0
-
Thanks for the decency of a reply. I'm not convinced that I wholly agree with you (and I'm fairly well versed on FS regs) but at least that shows thought. I'm very bored with people thinking that acting as a facsimile of the Daily Mail is an adequate replacement of for actual thought. No money changes hands here and you get what you pay for but I always took the view with trainees and junior lawyers that, ultimately, it didn't matter if they were right or wrong, as long as they had give real thought to the matter before reaching their conclusion. That's on, in the grand scheme of things, unimportant matters. unfortunately, I don't think that the motto, "think more, say less" is a winner.Charles said:
The problem is that regulations are specific to each industry, so not many people can give you multiple examples.matt said:
Thank you. It's good that it won't apply in the EEA then.Charles said:
Are there any others? This is a real question. What are the changes in national law which will happen as a result of EU derived legislation bring repealed? It's that uncertainty point.
However, looking at lifesciences and financial services (the two sectors I know best) what you consistently see is the multinationals lobbying at the Brussels level for higher and more complex regulations. This is because it creates a barrier to entry as well as a raising fixed costs for all market participants - thus creating a relative competitive advantage for the bigger players.
Of course this will still happen at the national level, but the SMEs will have a better chance to interact with their national ministers on an even footing to the MNCs.
I think that it's a reasonable assumption that MNCs behave the same in other industries.0 -
Tissue Price and David Herdson also have votesJohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too0 -
Sure, it sounds like a simple choice, but where has betting against Boris succeeding ever gotten anyone?Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.0 -
Nah - it would have never worked in negotiations because (ignoring the fact it's a bilateral not an EU agreement) it would have been rightly viewed as a threat.Paristonda said:
Surprising he's announcing it now though - would have been good leverage in negotiations. That tells me the EU is serious about its no negotiating\special treatment stand, so no need to hold that card to his chest. They will offer standard EEA or Nothing at all, no negotiations.RobD said:More scaremongering debunked:
"French President Francois Hollande has said that Britain's vote to leave the EU should not affect a deal to stop migrants crossing the Channel, which led to many being stuck at camps in Calais."
That's not a good way to build a consensual relationship between negotiators.
But by pre-announcing it like this he comes across as fair and reasonable, so sending a signal that France can be dealt with (which may create opportunities further down the line)0 -
Leavers just like throwing their weight around....AlastairMeeks said:Fatties for FREEDOM:
https://twitter.com/philipjcowley/status/7482558899168542720 -
Then there is David Herdson (I think he's a Tory supporter, perhaps even a member)0
-
Me too possibly, I rejoined Monday morning but don't know if that's me 'in' or not.TheScreamingEagles said:
Tissue Price and David Herdson also have votesJohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too0 -
Where they go, the nation will follow.surbiton said:Engineering Employers Federation asks Art.50 not to be invoked.
I'm being glib, but in fairness the longer it's not declared the more voices will ask it never be invoked. But it'd take a tsunami for the clamour to be unavoidable.0 -
What does the constitution of our new party (not obsessed about Europe/gays etc.) say about entryism?Scrapheap_as_was said:
Me too possibly, I rejoined Monday morning but don't know if that's me 'in' or not.TheScreamingEagles said:
Tissue Price and David Herdson also have votesJohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too0 -
I've never read the EEA agreement (and have no intention of ever doing so). But I find the discussions interesting & have a good memory for details.TOPPING said:
hmm I'd like to see the link.Charles said:
He did - much earlier in the conversationTOPPING said:
Interesting if so. Now why couldn't Richard, who has had a copy of the EEA Agreement under his bed since he was twelve years old, tell me that?MaxPB said:
I believe it is possible to unilaterally take up any vetoed regulations or legislmation and the EU would consider it settled.
Any link?
Thank goodness he has you as his wing man.0 -
It is a strong correlation!AlastairMeeks said:Fatties for FREEDOM:
https://twitter.com/philipjcowley/status/748255889916854272
Who ate all the pies?
0 -
Three months before you can vote. You might just scrape inScrapheap_as_was said:
Me too possibly, I rejoined Monday morning but don't know if that's me 'in' or not.TheScreamingEagles said:
Tissue Price and David Herdson also have votesJohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too.
0 -
I honestly don't now know what you are going on about. You are quoting bits of what I have said back at me as if it proves some point but what that point is I have no idea. Your posts on this over the last few hours have become rather incoherent.TOPPING said:Here's an expert on the matter:
"All EFTA members have a veto over the expansion of the EEA agreement (hence the Norwegian refusal to allow it to include oil and gas legislation)"
You said that Richard.
All EFTA members but only three (soon to be four?) who care about the EEA Agreement - Norway (the example you cited), Liechtenstein, and Iceland.
So if any of those non-EU EEA/EFTA members object to an expansion of the EEA Agreement which would otherwise benefit the UK, they would veto it.
And vice versa.
So much time studying the agreement..so little understanding.
Actually you do of course understand it as you gave me the example of Norway using the veto. It's just that you are in denial about it. You should try to lose the blog/chatroom mentality where you insult people and refuse to accept a point. It does you no favours.
EFTA members (4 of them not 3) can block our joining EFTA. If we do not join EFTA we do not remain in the EEA. Bad news.
However it appears that they are very keen for us to join EFTA so not bad news.
Once we are in EFTA we retain our place in the EEA. Good news.
Once in the EEA as an EFTA member rather than an EU member we are only subject to around 9% of the total EU legislative burden. Good news.
We cannot impose any new regulation on fellow EFTA members and they cannot impose it on us. Good news.
This does not mean we cannot adopt legislation unilaterally if we choose to do so although I don't really see any reason why we would do that. Good news.
If there is any move to increase the scope of the EEA agreement to cover new areas we can veto it - Very good news.
If there is any new legislation covered by the EEA agreement that we feel is fundamentally against our interests then we can also veto that - good news.
Not really seeing a downside here Topping.0 -
Have you read his letter - he claims 3 of Corbyn's inner circle were trying to get leave to win...SimonStClare said:
That’s a bit rich coming from the head of Labour’s Remain campaign – the guy was invisible.Scrapheap_as_was said:The postman has gone postal... especially his last few paras
https://twitter.com/OliverKamm/status/7482531787564974080 -
Most of them just showed how in touch they were with those 9m voters by enthusiastically backing the Remain campaign.MarqueeMark said:0 -
I'm launching a reverse takeoverRobD said:
What does the constitution of our new party (not obsessed about Europe/gays etc.) say about entryism?Scrapheap_as_was said:
Me too possibly, I rejoined Monday morning but don't know if that's me 'in' or not.TheScreamingEagles said:
Tissue Price and David Herdson also have votesJohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too0 -
I'm not sure if I'm a member or not... they send me ballots but I don't remember paying my dues for agesJohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too
(Equally, I've donated several lifetimes worth of annual dues in the past)0 -
Personally I don't doubt he has a really good chance of winning, just that I think he shouldn't.kle4 said:
Sure, it sounds like a simple choice, but where has betting against Boris succeeding ever gotten anyone?Jobabob said:
We have a choice between a 60-year-old calm headed woman with bags of experience and a passion for country walks or a bone idle testosterone-fuelled professional clown who betrayed his party, prime minister and former mayoral territory.SeanT said:
Yes, this is May's to lose. Boris is just too combustible. He'd have been a great PM in a time of confidence and expansion, he'd have made us laugh and done surprising and good things, and told great jokes.Jobabob said:
Genius!Scott_P said:i understand May will appoint either Boris or Gove Minister for Brexit
So when it all goes tits up they still get the blame, and she can swoop in and sign the deal they should have done all along.
Liking it so far...
But... this is nerve wracking. Tedious managerial competence is required. May did pretty well in probably the worst job in politics, Home Sec. She doesn't rock my coracle with her charisma but it's rocky enough, anyway.
Now let me think.0 -
I think Angela Eagle would be hopeless. The Tories must be praying for her to winJonathan said:
Nick Palmer and BigJohnOwls are clearly pulling for the Tories at the moment. You should give them a vote.JohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
Perhaps you could list her qualities apart from being able to turn on the waterworks at will.
Why do you think she is the anything other than a disaster
4TH OUT OF 5 for Deputy last time suddenly your favoured candidate.
The PLP sparked a crisis then wanted to impose Jarvis without a vote
Insulting to any Democratic Socialist IMO.
What does your CLP think.
Mine is seething
0 -
I don't agree.foxinsoxuk said:Though it was the Thatcher years that accelerated the already existing trend of deindustrialisation.
Between 1973 and 1979, manufacturing as a percentage of UK GDP declined by 2.7 percentage points, or about 0.4%/year. Between 1979 and 1990, it declined by 5.4 percentage points, or about the same rate (assuming mineral oil processing held steady between those years). Very slightly faster, but you'd need a microscope to see the difference in the stats. See https://catalogue.pearsoned.co.uk/assets/hip/gb/hip_gb_pearsonhighered/samplechapter/0273736906.pdf table 1.2.0 -
I no longer have a vote but had I one it would be for Mrs MayTheScreamingEagles said:
Tissue Price and David Herdson also have votesJohnO said:Just of interest how many posters here will actually be part of the Tory 'selectorate'?
Apart from me, there is Richard N, TSE, Max, Casino, Plato, Concanvasser...must be more surely? So far I count 5 for May, 2 for Johnson.
And Marquee Mark I think too0 -
There's a strong rumour he might be writing his resignation letter...MarqueeMark said:
Well he must be busy doing SOMETHING....Scrapheap_as_was said:
Nope... I'm hearing Charlie Falconer is in the frame for doing the dirty.MarqueeMark said:
MI5, I guess....alex. said:BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???
0 -
Who would still be far, far, far better than Corbyn. With the possible exception of John McDonnell, Corbyn is the LEAST electable Labour MP in the Commons.bigjohnowls said:
These guys really cannot inspire confidence surely have the nerve to have no confidence in the leader at a time like this and have no clue what to do next.Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Spoken to several Labour MPs. Told very strong feeling in PLP that no one should declare tomorrow. Confirmed Owen Smith taking soundings.
I know these people are totally fking useless but some of us have MONEY ON THIS FFS!
Completely incompetent.
Its not as though Lab has changed the system and somehow wrong footed them.
Incompetent fools cant think beyond ABC but then realise nobodys called that
We will end up with Liz Kendall as the challenger at this rate.
WAKE UP
P.S. Has Nick declared whether he thinks Corbyn should stay or go yet? We've been waiting longer for him than Charlie bloody Falconer0 -
if only there were some templates to use...numbertwelve said:
There's a strong rumour he might be writing his resignation letter...MarqueeMark said:
Well he must be busy doing SOMETHING....Scrapheap_as_was said:
Nope... I'm hearing Charlie Falconer is in the frame for doing the dirty.MarqueeMark said:
MI5, I guess....alex. said:BTW, who leaked this Vine-Gove email???
0 -
Labour: Piss Poor Planning Prevents Proper Performance0
-
I find that figure one of the most depressing aspects of the referendum vote.John_M said:
18-24 was 36.4%.IanB2 said:
The turnout of pensioners was at a record high, the turnout of working class voters in safe seats rose more than was expected, the turnout of younger voters esp 18-24 appears to have been below 50%. Turnout in Scotland and London was good, but not as good as most of the English provinces. Thus turnout rose, but not evenly.nunu said:
The highest increases came from council estates, in Scotland where the debate was one sided turnout was similar to GE, I.e. middle class more likely to turnout.Paristonda said:slightly off topic. - I was thinking about the pre referendum predictions on turnout - the consensus seemed to be sub-60% meant leave, 60-75% meant remain, and above 75% meant leave. I don't think anyone was saying leave on 72% turnout - any theories on why we saw decently but not massively elevated turnout from GE yet a leave vote?
0