Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Theresa May’s new government, we’re nearly there

135

Comments

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    AnneJGP said:

    May has really surprised me - a massive recasting of government and a massive power shift away from the Cameroons. Surely they can't be happy?

    They are a dwindling band of yesterdays men.....and Cameron will be personally loyal - so I doubt they'll get up to much mischief. Quite a skilful redeployment of the talents - if you BREXIT you own it.....
    That's an amusing line, but wouldn't it have been seen as trying to negate the referendum outcome if Ms May had appointed Remain-leaning people?
    Only by the paranoid.
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,856
    Apparently as ex-EFTA members we can rejoin EFTA if we pay the £25 rejoining fee (used to be just £3) but we have to look sharp. EFTA rules state they have to receive the money between 18th and 20th July.

    I think this is right.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,442

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Is it truly egalitarian if there are hardly any former public schoolboys and schoolgirls there? You'd think if it was truly egalitarian, based on merit that there would be some. Penalising people for their parents choices is not egalitarian.

    Fallon, Hunt, Johnson, Rudd all ex public school and a higher percentage of the Cabinet than the 7% nationally
    I suspect the Commons let alone the Tory share of it is not 7% so that's not surely the right figure to use.
    The Tory share ex public school is now about 50% and the Commons about 20 to 30%
    So you'd expect roughly 10 ex public school not 4.
    Depends what you want it to correlate to.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531
    surbiton said:

    This is beginning to look like a coup at the top of the Conservative Party. The plebs are in charge now. Only the bumbling idiot is the token rep.

    "We are all plebs now!"
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:

    Some interesting choices and perhaps some questionable ones as well. She has the power and the right to choose who she wants and she is clearly stamping her authority in line with her vision for the future. Have to see how it plays out.

    The Boris/Fox/Davis triumvirate for me has po just say well I gave your lot the power to sort it out. But on the other hand if it doesn't work out she could still take damage from it, people will question her judgement.

    [Snipped]

    If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own this, regardless of whether the mess was created by the 3 Brexiteers. She's in charge now. So she had better make it clear to them what vision of Brexit she has and make sure they do their best to get it. And the Merkels of this world are going to want to deal with the organ grinder, not the monkeys - whatever their titles.

    I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.

    What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
    Exactly right. Cyclefree is a shrewdie.

    I'd go a step further.

    The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants.

    On the main issue of the day---Brexit---the PM does not have the luxury of being able to delegate the job. It is squarely in her lap, and she'll stand or fall on the results. She will have to do it herself.

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    No one is going to be up in arms at the fact that the country is 4% poorer than it might otherwise have been, and by 2020 almost nothing will be known.

    The damage Brexit will cause will be its opportunity cost. £100m not being invested here, £100m in extra costs for business there.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,161
    kle4 said:

    Popcorntastic:

    Michael Crick ‏@MichaelLCrick 27m27 minutes ago
    Mike Foster's legal action against Labour NEC decision that Corbyn automatically on ballot paper will be heard High Court last week in July

    The courts need to catch up, politics now moves way too fast for us to wait that long!
    Does this hold the whole thing up, or will they plough on and hope that his Honour doesn't block the whole caboodle?
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,286
    I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    "The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."

    Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.

    To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    felix said:

    Mr. Cocque, that may be an error by May.

    If she'd peeled off Osborne's lieutenants, he'd be not quite alone on the backbenches, but diminished. As it is, he and his followers (or ex-followers) far exceed the Conservative majority. It's possible she'll be fine. It's possible she's made the Morsi Mistake.

    I think Osborne will support the government to which he'll eventually return - hopefully after a successful Brexit.
    She's no fool. My guess is she's thought of that and she doesn't care. There are various reasons for this, but I'd guess the most likely is because she's already decided there will be another election before long.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531
    JohnO said:

    AndyJS said:

    JohnO said:

    David Lidington is 60 (elected 1992), ditto Green...the average age of this Cabinet must surely be notably higher than the last.

    The majority of the members of the new cabinet are older than Cameron.
    Theresa Grey's team?
    "Mrs May will see you now..."
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    LOL only on PB could I see people concerned that there are not enough public school boys/girls in the cabinet....
    surbiton said:

    This is beginning to look like a coup at the top of the Conservative Party. The plebs are in charge now. Only the bumbling idiot is the token rep.

    I wonder what Andrew Mitchell thinks of 'the rise of the plebs'....
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    JohnO said:

    I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?

    So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,286
    edited July 2016

    JohnO said:

    AndyJS said:

    JohnO said:

    David Lidington is 60 (elected 1992), ditto Green...the average age of this Cabinet must surely be notably higher than the last.

    The majority of the members of the new cabinet are older than Cameron.
    Theresa Grey's team?
    "Mrs May will see you now..."
    ...."Prime Minister, Where do you want me?"
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,286
    edited July 2016
    GeoffM said:

    JohnO said:

    I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?

    So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
    I'd be the 21 Century Vicar of Bray (if I weren't a Papist).
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,732
    GeoffM said:

    JohnO said:

    I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?

    So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
    Sensibly covering all the bases, or maybe he's hoping for two peerages.... :D
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    TGOHF said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Is it me or is the England over rate utterly farcical ?

    Cook thinks his spinner is mince (rightly) and hence its been all pace - one of which is Broad who is the worst culprit for over rate.
    Last 10 overs , 53 runs. Moeen going for 40 off 6 overs. Cook has to keep him on , otherwise he could miss the next test due to over rate.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,161
    Nothing for Rory Stewart so far. Shame. I do hope he gets a big job in FCO.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited July 2016
    Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:

    Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.

    George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.

    Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.

    It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.


    http://reaction.life/mays-rise-seals-incredible-destruction-entire-generation-top-tories/
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,286

    Nothing for Rory Stewart so far. Shame. I do hope he gets a big job in FCO.

    Better change his wiki education entry to Slough Comprehensive.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,769
    It's the gift that'll never stop giving:

    https://twitter.com/eddiefornec/status/753620828584042496
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,179
    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,044
    John_M said:

    AnneJGP said:

    May has really surprised me - a massive recasting of government and a massive power shift away from the Cameroons. Surely they can't be happy?

    They are a dwindling band of yesterdays men.....and Cameron will be personally loyal - so I doubt they'll get up to much mischief. Quite a skilful redeployment of the talents - if you BREXIT you own it.....
    That's an amusing line, but wouldn't it have been seen as trying to negate the referendum outcome if Ms May had appointed Remain-leaning people?
    Amusing? It doesn't even scan. People are still grieving I suppose.

    I'm with @Topping in that the glam factor is reduced (modulo Boris). This is a cabinet full of experience. I don't really care who voted Remain/Leave. They all have a lot to do. Its execution that matters. I can't see May being as forgiving as Cameron, so hopefully that will concentrate minds.
    I agree. I shall be very interested to see how the experience element works out.

    It's not just experience of how politics works, it's the length of time they've had to watch effects, see things come round for the nth time, think through how they'd tackle things, and so on.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,179
    Pulpstar said:

    It's the gift that'll never stop giving:

    Is Eddie 4 Eagle?
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    JohnO said:

    But more fun (and insights) for the second and third tier of junior Ministers. Could any of last year's intake get their first mits around the greasy pole? Or the overlooked from 2010?

    From the 2015ers, Chris Philp, perhaps?
    Imagine a member of the 2015 intake suddenly being given a government job.

    image

    PREPOSTEROUS.
    Boris Johnson

    MP 2001-2008
    Mayor of London 2008-2016
    Foreign Secretary 2016-

    Hardly a newbie.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,732

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Wait, I thought being in the EU was good for the environment? :D
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    I'm with @Cyclefree. May cannot distance herself from Brexit via cabinet composition. That's not a valid firebreak. She will have to lead on it, she will have to own it.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,161
    JohnO said:

    Nothing for Rory Stewart so far. Shame. I do hope he gets a big job in FCO.

    Better change his wiki education entry to Slough Comprehensive.
    This is getting ridiculous. What if there's another battle of Waterloo?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,188
    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own this, regardless of whether the mess was created by the 3 Brexiteers. She's in charge now. So she had better make it clear to them what vision of Brexit she has and make sure they do their best to get it. And the Merkels of this world are going to want to deal with the organ grinder, not the monkeys - whatever their titles.

    I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.

    What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
    [Snipped]

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    No one is going to be up in arms at the fact that the country is 4% poorer than it might otherwise have been, and by 2020 almost nothing will be known.

    The damage Brexit will cause will be its opportunity cost. £100m not being invested here, £100m in extra costs for business there.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.

    But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Misbah-ul-Haq gets a 100 at Lords at the age of 42.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    AndyJS said:

    Misbah-ul-Haq gets a 100 at Lords at the age of 42.

    He will retire at 65.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024
    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    surbiton said:

    RIP Osborne. RIP Osborne's inner circle. RIP Osborneism. RIP anyone who'd ever even look at George Osborne.

    TSE won't be happy with that :lol:
    And Richard "the Sage" Nabavi.
    Near perfect chancellor sacked from Cabinet

    Is there a minister for folding towels?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,161
    Pence now at 1/12 on BF for GOP veep.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    John_M said:

    I'm with @Cyclefree. May cannot distance herself from Brexit via cabinet composition. That's not a valid firebreak. She will have to lead on it, she will have to own it.
    I agree - but she's bought herself a degree of insurance from back bench sniping in the HoC.

    If BREXIT is a disaster the whole government goes down....what will Mrs Bone say?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531

    JohnO said:

    Nothing for Rory Stewart so far. Shame. I do hope he gets a big job in FCO.

    Better change his wiki education entry to Slough Comprehensive.
    This is getting ridiculous. What if there's another battle of Waterloo?
    Luckily, Southern don't serve Waterloo :)
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    edited July 2016
    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own this, regardless of whether the mess was created by the 3 Brexiteers. She's in charge now. So she had better make it clear to them what vision of Brexit she has and make sure they do their best to get it. And the Merkels of this world are going to want to deal with the organ grinder, not the monkeys - whatever their titles.

    I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.

    What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
    [Snipped]

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.

    But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
    I completely agree with all but your last point.

    The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.

    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531

    Pulpstar said:

    It's the gift that'll never stop giving:

    Is Eddie 4 Eagle?
    You didn't need the "4" :lol:
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    JohnO said:

    GeoffM said:

    JohnO said:

    I honestly don't see Osborne, Gove, Letwin, Morgan et al causing any trouble on the backbenches. On what are they going to rebel if May continues with a broad based, inclusive one-nation govt, which I have little doubt she will?

    So, you're holding on for the next honours list now? LOL
    I'd be the 21 Century Vicar of Bray (if I weren't a Papist).
    No bar:

    When Royal James possest the crown,
    And popery grew in fashion;
    The Penal Law I shouted down,
    And read the Declaration:
    The Church of Rome I found would fit
    Full well my Constitution,
    And I had been a Jesuit
    But for the Revolution.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Naught but pro-REMAIN propaganda!

    Oh hang on... :)
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649

    "The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."

    Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.

    To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.

    That's one way of putting it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676
    edited July 2016
    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    If Brexit turns out to be a disaster, May will own
    I think this is more about making sure that while the negotiations are going on the Brexiteers can't snipe at her and, if what is arrived at is not to the liking of some of them, of having the necessary cover.

    What is more interesting to me is how Hammond will work them. He is the one who will want to ensure that any deal does not eff up the economy so badly. In the end if it does that will do for May and him and the Tories' chances at the next election. So he should want to make sure that he gets the right input into any deal. Whether he will or not is another matter.
    [Snipped]

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    No one is going to be up in arms at the fact that the country is 4% poorer than it might otherwise have been, and by 2020 almost nothing will be known.

    The damage Brexit will cause will be its opportunity cost. £100m not being invested here, £100m in extra costs for business there.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.

    But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
    Yes perhaps. But if it is WTO (more likely with Davis in charge and Brexiteers abundant in cabinet) then the line will be "you see - we do have access to the SM" and no one apart from a few will know or care about the differences between "access" and "part of". No one cared for sure during the campaign.

    So I am still of the opinion that the country will be poorer than it otherwise would have been but imperceptibly so.

    Then again, I am certainly looking forward to the zero-rating of VAT on home energy supplies.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531
    JohnO said:

    JohnO said:

    AndyJS said:

    JohnO said:

    David Lidington is 60 (elected 1992), ditto Green...the average age of this Cabinet must surely be notably higher than the last.

    The majority of the members of the new cabinet are older than Cameron.
    Theresa Grey's team?
    "Mrs May will see you now..."
    ...."Prime Minister, Where do you want me?"
    "Be gentle, Theresa! That's not the "position" I was interested in!"
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Lol, not at all. Its because East African Asians are business owners and wanr lower taxes.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,179
    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
  • MarcKleinMarcKlein Posts: 36

    Pence now at 1/12 on BF for GOP veep.

    Will anyone care trumppence?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,725
    Pulpstar said:

    It's the gift that'll never stop giving:

    https://twitter.com/eddiefornec/status/753620828584042496

    The hopeful man standing for the hopeless party.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,121
    I think the new government looks like a serious government for serious times.

    Very pleased with Tezza so far.
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649

    Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:

    Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.

    George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.

    Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.

    It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.


    http://reaction.life/mays-rise-seals-incredible-destruction-entire-generation-top-tories/

    On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Surbiton is just clueless because he is a Labourite identity politics type.
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649
    MaxPB said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Surbiton is just clueless because he is a Labourite identity politics type.
    He is clueless in many more ways than that.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    RobD said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Wait, I thought being in the EU was good for the environment? :D
    Was this information held back until after the referendum ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,732
    GIN1138 said:

    I think the new government looks like a serious government for serious times.

    Very pleased with Tezza so far.

    Tezza and Jezza :D
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
  • PaulyPauly Posts: 897
    TSEs final comment is stupid. Egalitarians treat everyone equal regardless of what school their parents sent them to.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    pbr2013 said:

    Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:

    Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.

    George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.

    Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.

    It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.


    http://reaction.life/mays-rise-seals-incredible-destruction-entire-generation-top-tories/

    On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
    Cameron's finest hour was undoubtedly forming the coalition government then running it smoothly for 5 years - no mean feat. He's been sloppy, slapdash & lazy since winning the majority - three adjectives no one has ever applied to May......
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,188
    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.

    But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
    I completely agree with all but your last point.

    The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.

    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,690
    GIN1138 said:

    I think the new government looks like a serious government for serious times.

    Very pleased with Tezza so far.

    Apart from Liam Fox, yes.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,732
    TGOHF said:

    RobD said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Wait, I thought being in the EU was good for the environment? :D
    Was this information held back until after the referendum ?
    Probably. And soon we will see the plans to create a "Grand Army of the Union".. to counter the increasing threat of something or other. :D
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
    Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,179
    rcs1000 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I think the new government looks like a serious government for serious times.

    Very pleased with Tezza so far.

    Apart from Liam Fox, yes.
    Yes, that one struck me as being only one step removed from appointing Prince Andrew as international trade minister.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    GIN1138 said:

    I think the new government looks like a serious government for serious times.

    Very pleased with Tezza so far.

    ARSE licker .... :smile:
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649
    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.

    But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
    I completely agree with all but your last point.

    The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.

    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
    Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531
    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    RobD said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Wait, I thought being in the EU was good for the environment? :D
    Was this information held back until after the referendum ?
    Probably. And soon we will see the plans to create a "Grand Army of the Union".. to counter the increasing threat of something or other. :D
    The European Union reorganised into The First Galactic Empire? :D
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,576
    pbr2013 said:

    Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:

    Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.

    George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.

    Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.

    It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.


    http://reaction.life/mays-rise-seals-incredible-destruction-entire-generation-top-tories/

    On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
    I keep seeing this and it still makes no sense to me. What brought them down was they weren't strong enough to not hold a referendum, then were inadequate to the task of winning it for their side. Even if they thought they would win, it wasn't believing that , believing propaganda, which brought them down, they clearly fought as hard as possible with no complacency, they just weren't up to the task of getting a better deal then selling the deal they did get. That's inadequacy, on this issue, not arrogance. Even if that was there, it wasn't why they lost, since it didn't manifest in not trying hard enough.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
    Racist stereo-typing!
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    MaxPB said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
    Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531
    pbr2013 said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
    Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
    Hmm. even more racist stereo-typing!
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649

    rcs1000 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    I think the new government looks like a serious government for serious times.

    Very pleased with Tezza so far.

    Apart from Liam Fox, yes.
    Yes, that one struck me as being only one step removed from appointing Prince Andrew as international trade minister.
    That would be an excellent appointment. We still haven't had the junior trade minister announcements. It would unite the nation.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
    https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/588242783317712896
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    FF43 said:



    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.

    The word from the US is that they want the UK to be involved with the TTIP because it's dead without our involvement. It won't pass without the UK, at which point we'll be first in the queue, but the US want to have their cake and eat it so are trying to get a way for the UK into the TTIP either as an additional contracting party or as an EU associate signatory.
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649
    edited July 2016

    pbr2013 said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
    Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
    Hmm. even more racist stereo-typing!
    Which is what I was trying to highlight about surbiton's post.
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536

    "The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."

    Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.

    To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.

    They need, in general, to be removed from the process entirely until the implementation stage.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Cameron's finest hour was undoubtedly forming the coalition government then running it smoothly for 5 years - no mean feat. He's been sloppy, slapdash & lazy since winning the majority - three adjectives no one has ever applied to May......

    The irony is that Cameron's majority on the back of LibDem gains ensured that the referendum went ahead whereas a continuing Coalition would have blocked it and he'd still be PM et al.

    Funny old lark this politics business.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.



    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
    I think we all get a little carried away with FTAs. The EU has FTAs (or similar) with two out of its top ten trade partners. The WTO has been quite effective at reducing tariffs globally. It is now increasingly concerned with non-tariff barriers (per the G20 trade ministers communique
    last week)

    https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news16_e/dgra_09jul16_e.pdf

    In terms of the US, I quite understand their position - with TTIP struggling, the UK is hardly a priority.

    IIRC the EU has 33 FTAs, EFTA has 26. Presented purely for information, rather than to make any particular point :).
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649
    kle4 said:

    pbr2013 said:

    Iain Martin published this 23 hours ago before the full extent of the changes were known:

    Six months ago David Cameron was dominant. He had saved the Union and won an election, returning the Tory party to a majority position.

    George Osborne readied himself for the succession. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson worked to overtake Osborne. The great reformer Michael Gove weighed his options ahead of the referendum. Other ministers, MPs, chums and advisers who had hitched their wagons to the Cameron/Osborne project bustled around enjoying power or proximity to power.

    Underneath them, a whole social network – with its own manners, assumptions and habits – whirred away in London and nice parts of the home counties at weekends.

    It is all turned to dust now....... The group that only recently dominated British politics is now history.


    http://reaction.life/mays-rise-seals-incredible-destruction-entire-generation-top-tories/

    On the whole, I think that the Cameroons did well in government, esp in the Coalition. But somehow the tears just won't come. They brought it on themselves, believing their own propaganda.
    I keep seeing this and it still makes no sense to me. What brought them down was they weren't strong enough to not hold a referendum, then were inadequate to the task of winning it for their side. Even if they thought they would win, it wasn't believing that , believing propaganda, which brought them down, they clearly fought as hard as possible with no complacency, they just weren't up to the task of getting a better deal then selling the deal they did get. That's inadequacy, on this issue, not arrogance. Even if that was there, it wasn't why they lost, since it didn't manifest in not trying hard enough.
    I don't think for a minute that they thought there was any realistic chance of losing it. Classic hubris to nemesis. They only ever beat Brown, Salmond and Milliband. That doesn't make you a political genius. Their luck just ran out.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Trump's VP candidate = Mike Pence.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
    Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
    What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,188
    pbr2013 said:

    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.

    But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
    I completely agree with all but your last point.

    The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.

    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
    Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
    eg this: Transatlantic trade treaties are no quick fix for Brexit
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,676

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
    Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
    What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
    Because their customers couldn't give a flying f8ck.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    It's Mike Pence.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,188
    edited July 2016
    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    I



    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
    I think we all get a little carried away with FTAs. The EU has FTAs (or similar) with two out of its top ten trade partners. The WTO has been quite effective at reducing tariffs globally. It is now increasingly concerned with non-tariff barriers (per the G20 trade ministers communique
    last week)

    https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news16_e/dgra_09jul16_e.pdf

    In terms of the US, I quite understand their position - with TTIP struggling, the UK is hardly a priority.

    IIRC the EU has 33 FTAs, EFTA has 26. Presented purely for information, rather than to make any particular point :).
    We are drifting away from the original subject of the political risk of Brexit. Are you suggesting Free Trade Agreements don't matter that much? If so, I agree, except for the one with the EU.

    [EDIT] They can make a significant difference to trade but we are talking about the collective quality of the FTA set under one scenario rather than under another. I don't think there is likely to be a big difference - except for the EU Treaty because that's our most important one and we are killing it.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
    Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
    What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
    Because the Commission who overlooked their illegal antics are also in charge of the EU response because they set the air quality standards. The German government also seems to be giving them protection because they know all the German car makers have been at it, as proved by the new UK tests.
  • pbr2013pbr2013 Posts: 649
    FF43 said:

    pbr2013 said:

    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.

    But if a politician says, as David Davis has just done, "Of course Germany et al will be rational and sign up to full access to the SM with no FOM because they want to sell us lots of cars" and then Merkel turns round and says, "No way!". It subsequently turns out completely different from what was said, so the government loses a lot of credibility. Ditto if a high profile employers says, "We are off to Holland because they are in the EU, but Britain isn't" Ditto, a high profile FTA gets canned because the other country decides to concentrate on its relations with the EU instead.
    I completely agree with all but your last point.

    The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.

    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
    Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
    eg this: Transatlantic trade treaties are no quick fix for Brexit
    The only actual quote from a US trade official there is one saying we will have to wait and see. And you misquoted him, no doubt accidently.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    TOPPING said:

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
    Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
    What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
    Because their customers couldn't give a flying f8ck.
    Not really. It's the Commission that are holding back national responses as they want an EU wide settlement.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,161
    AndyJS said:

    Trump's VP candidate = Mike Pence.

    This sourced?
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    MaxPB said:

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
    Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
    What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
    Because the Commission who overlooked their illegal antics are also in charge of the EU response because they set the air quality standards. The German government also seems to be giving them protection because they know all the German car makers have been at it, as proved by the new UK tests.
    All car manufacturers would be using the same OEM suppliers, and those OEM suppliers had to know what was going on.

  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    I think this assumes anyone will know if Brexit is a success or failure.

    Estimates (ok let's leave out Patrick Minford's) put the likely diminution of aggregate and per capita GDP by 2030 of anywhere between 1.5-6% and 0.8-1% respectively.

    Nothing you can drop on your foot so I think May and the Gruesome Threesome are pretty much in the clear.
    The political risks come when demands or predictions made are very publicly not met. There is absolutely no doubt there will be a deal.



    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
    I think we all get a little carried away with FTAs. The EU has FTAs (or similar) with two out of its top ten trade partners. The WTO has been quite effective at reducing tariffs globally. It is now increasingly concerned with non-tariff barriers (per the G20 trade ministers communique
    last week)

    https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news16_e/dgra_09jul16_e.pdf

    In terms of the US, I quite understand their position - with TTIP struggling, the UK is hardly a priority.

    IIRC the EU has 33 FTAs, EFTA has 26. Presented purely for information, rather than to make any particular point :).
    We are drifting away from the original subject of the political risk of Brexit. Are you suggesting Free Trade Agreements don't matter that much? If so, I agree, except for the one with the EU.
    That seems reasonable.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    Eddie Izzard means well, bless him. Nonetheless WTF is a 'radical moderate'? Surely that's an oxymoron?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,518
    pbr2013 said:



    The only actual quote from a US trade official there is one saying we will have to wait and see. And you misquoted him, no doubt accidently.

    Well the FT had someone from the US on record saying that if all else fails the TPP is easy and on offer to the UK.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    runnymede said:

    "The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."

    Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.

    To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.

    They need, in general, to be removed from the process entirely until the implementation stage.
    I don't think it is possible to exclude civil servants from government business. Someone has to do the preparatory work and write the position papers for a minister.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    runnymede said:

    MaxPB said:

    Breaking news in Germany that the EU commission knew about the emissions scandal in 2010 and did nothing about it.

    Who still wants to pretend that the Commission isn't just an outpost of German industry?
    Plenty of clowns on here I imagine
    What I still do not understand is why Volkswagen are no up their arse in lawsuits and prosecutions. They deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to deceive the regulators and their customers and have admitted as much. They must have broken all sorts of laws. Why are they not be hounded through the courts?
    They are. Figures like $15 bn and upwards are floating around for the provision they have made for settling lawsuits.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067
    pbr2013 said:

    pbr2013 said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
    Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
    Hmm. even more racist stereo-typing!
    Which is what I was trying to highlight about surbiton's post.
    Ethnic minorities disproportionately vote Labour - this is not news. However, a combination of David Cameron and the emergence of UKIP have made the Tories a much more attractive proposition.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    JackW said:

    Cameron's finest hour was undoubtedly forming the coalition government then running it smoothly for 5 years - no mean feat. He's been sloppy, slapdash & lazy since winning the majority - three adjectives no one has ever applied to May......

    The irony is that Cameron's majority on the back of LibDem gains ensured that the referendum went ahead whereas a continuing Coalition would have blocked it and he'd still be PM et al.

    Funny old lark this politics business.
    He was hoping for a coalition too. But he attacked the yellows too much. Maybe he didn't think they would collapse like their promises.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,662
    Mr. 2013, the Remain campaign should've won easily. A better deal, a better campaign would've won it 60/40 at a canter.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    Eddie Izzard means well, bless him. Nonetheless WTF is a 'radical moderate'? Surely that's an oxymoron?

    It’s an oxymoron as you say – I think Eddie is trying to distinguish between the radical moderates, who are merely nuts and the radical radicals which are totally barking.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,531
    pbr2013 said:

    pbr2013 said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    nunu said:

    surbiton said:

    John_M said:
    Brilliant. The economy will get a boost for years to come. Despite their Muslim background, they will vote CDU when they are eligible. Shrewd Merkel.
    They won't vote CDU.
    THe SPD would have been their natural home but people remember who helped them. The reason Ugandan Asians vote Tory amongst all ethnic minorities is because of Ted Heath.
    Is there any evidence of residual gratitude the the party in power at the time people immigrate? I would have thought that if the Ugandan Asians vote Tory it's because of an affinity on cultural values (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown excepted).

    When comparing with the situation in Germany there's also a huge difference in numbers. At a certain point, Islamic religious parties must become viable.
    Punjabis vote Labour. See Ealing Southall.
    Tamils in Kingston & Surbiton vote Con or Libdem.
    Hmm. even more racist stereo-typing!
    Which is what I was trying to highlight about surbiton's post.
    Oops, I see it now, sorry!
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,188
    pbr2013 said:

    FF43 said:

    pbr2013 said:

    FF43 said:

    John_M said:

    FF43 said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    jonny83 said:



    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [Snipped]

    [snipped]
    [snip]
    I completely agree with all but your last point.

    The EU is notoriously sclerotic (which should surprise precisely no one). CETA was agreed in September 2014. It has yet to be put before EU national parliaments. The SIngapore FTA was agreed in October 2014. It's not even scheduled for ratification yet.

    Brexit isn't going to be kittens and rainbows, but it's undeniably a hell of a lot easier to negotiate a bilateral FTA versus dealing with the EU en bloc
    I was thinking about this. Getting the UK to agree an FTA is definitely easier than herding the EU cats. However there is the other side to think about. They are not going to be more amenable to the UK than to the EU. Globalisation is out of fashion and that's putting dampers on free trade agreements. Britain is coming late to the party, while the EU has a number of FTAs in place or in the works. This is not co-incidental. Brexit is itself a manifestation of that anti-globalisation mood.

    On Obama's back of the queue comment. It was tendentious, maybe aggressive, but seems to be correct on the substance. US trade negotiators said since Brexit they have no current interest in doing an FTA with the UK. It makes no sense to do so until the UK sorts out its arrangement with the EU and until the US fixes its own agreement with the EU.
    Do you have a (post referendum) link for your last assertion?
    eg this: Transatlantic trade treaties are no quick fix for Brexit
    The only actual quote from a US trade official there is one saying we will have to wait and see. And you misquoted him, no doubt accidently.
    I don't much like your implication. I never claimed to quote from a particular article and my summary of the situation matches what was reported in the article.
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536

    runnymede said:

    "The three Brexiteers will be all but irrelevant in the negotiations on Brexit. Their main significance will be the influence they have on their civil servants."

    Do not underestimate the importance of doing just that. A large number of civil servants, especially at the FCO, have just had the rug of their world pulled out from beneath them and will be struggling to cope with the new requirements. Those same civil servants will be doing a lot of the detail and writing the position papers.

    To get a good deal for the UK those civil servants will need close guidance and support.

    They need, in general, to be removed from the process entirely until the implementation stage.
    I don't think it is possible to exclude civil servants from government business. Someone has to do the preparatory work and write the position papers for a minister.
    Of course it is. You set up your own unit with your own experts to do the prep work. Actually, if we want this to happen, such a move is probably essential. The civil service are working for the other side.
This discussion has been closed.