politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Something to consider about how amenable the EU27 might be to
Comments
-
Ireland spends 0.5% of GDP on defence. Austria and Switzerland 0.8%. Finland and Sweden ~1.5%. None of them spend 2%.dyedwoolie said:
They should be honest and call it 2.7% of GDP on interfering.another_richard said:
Britain seems to be the only country which pays both the 2% on Defence and the 0.7% on Overseas Aid.Andy_Cooke said:
Given what it does - increase UK influence and contribute to reducing unrest and trouble before they flare up - we could go further down the same route and free up even more cash if we slash Armed Forces expenditure by reducing them to a Homeland Defence role only.Alanbrooke said:
without it we could pay for free higher educationfoxinsoxuk said:
Without it we might have the popularity of Iran...Alanbrooke said:So despite spending a huge wodge on Foreign aid were seen as no better than anyone else
spot the budget saving
we might even try training some doctors for a change
If that's the road we want to take.
It doesn't seem to make us popular.
Perhaps they should be reduced to the same levels as Germany.
Defence ain't about defence and aid ain't about the unfortunate.
I'd support a UK cut to ~1%.
In terms of UK reputation, surely far better to use scarce resources to restore the funding of the World Service and British Council?
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmfaff/572/57206.htm0 -
sounds like a weird wedding to me, if anyone came up to me at a wedding and started talking mince about the Tories I would make a quick exit.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.0 -
Mrs C, whilst I appreciate your honesty, do I find it saddening that you think a country should give away its democratic self-government.
Yes, the current (domestic political) situation is deeply uninspiring. That's a problem with the current leadership, not with democracy, in the same way a bad king doesn't make the system of monarchy worthless.
It's a lot easier to give up rights and power than it is to achieve them in the first place, or to reclaim them once abandoned.0 -
Really? Was a uni wedding and we're all pretty lay-political (i.e. none of us actually work in politics itself). All the blokes from the stag do (during the election campaign) sought me out to chat about it.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.
I didn't prompt, either. I was absolutely staggered.
0 -
Better class of wedding in Dulwich, clearly...malcolmg said:
sounds like a weird wedding to me, if anyone came up to me at a wedding and started talking mince about the Tories I would make a quick exit.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.0 -
Which in all honesty is why I don't think you have a balanced view of public opinion. I can't go two days without someone at work talking about Brexit. And it is certainly not me who instigates it. As a consultant I am hugely aware that my position could be at risk if I upset the wrong people so I am extremely circumspect about my views. Even when the heated discussions get started I keep my opinions to myself. I save the arguments for on here.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.
I would say that amongst those I work with opinion is pretty much evenly split in terms of how they voted - at least as far as I can gather. But the idea that people don't talk about this almost all the time is quite alien to my experience.0 -
MD, you are marooned in your history books. We have no power and few rights.Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, whilst I appreciate your honesty, do I find it saddening that you think a country should give away its democratic self-government.
Yes, the current (domestic political) situation is deeply uninspiring. That's a problem with the current leadership, not with democracy, in the same way a bad king doesn't make the system of monarchy worthless.
It's a lot easier to give up rights and power than it is to achieve them in the first place, or to reclaim them once abandoned.
Just a faded memory and a country going to the dogs whilst the arses at
the top line their pockets.
0 -
Are you suggesting that once we leave the single market we will never, ever trade with the EU again? Sorry if I have misread it but that's the way it comes across to meSouthamObserver said:
That involves removing ourselves from the single market.Casino_Royale said:
We are not seeking to remove ourselves from that market. We are seeking to remove ourselves from political union.SouthamObserver said:
Surely we aspire to something more than national survival.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
The difference between the UK and every country on earth is that we are the only one currently seeking to remove ourselves from a market of which we have been an integral part for over 40 years and which accounts for well over 40% of all our exports.0 -
Indeed. Part of the reason I had so many conversations about it is almost certainly because I knew 50% of the guests at the wedding (was at uni with both bride and groom), and they know I'm one of the few Leavers amongst the group. In the real world, people who voted Remain are engaging with the notion of leaving far more than in the media/press/on here/in Westminster.Richard_Tyndall said:
Which in all honesty is why I don't think you have a balanced view of public opinion. I can't go two days without someone at work talking about Brexit. And it is certainly not me who instigates it. As a consultant I am hugely aware that my position could be at risk if I upset the wrong people so I am extremely circumspect about my views. Even when the heated discussions get started I keep my opinions to myself. I save the arguments for on here.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.
I would say that amongst those I work with opinion is pretty much evenly split in terms of how they voted - at least as far as I can gather. But the idea that people don't talk about this almost all the time is quite alien to my experience.
0 -
Indeed, but I think we need to move to a different stage of democracy. The US system involved states giving up independence in a Federal system, yet they still have a lot of authority and democracy. I think we need to move more that way. A Federal EU would not be a bad thing IMOMorris_Dancer said:Mrs C, whilst I appreciate your honesty, do I find it saddening that you think a country should give away its democratic self-government.
Yes, the current (domestic political) situation is deeply uninspiring. That's a problem with the current leadership, not with democracy, in the same way a bad king doesn't make the system of monarchy worthless.
It's a lot easier to give up rights and power than it is to achieve them in the first place, or to reclaim them once abandoned.
0 -
Sounds more like a bunch of fannies to me, your idea of "class" is a bit skewed methinks. You need to get out more and meet real people, you have more than a touch of the Theresa's.Mortimer said:
Better class of wedding in Dulwich, clearly...malcolmg said:
sounds like a weird wedding to me, if anyone came up to me at a wedding and started talking mince about the Tories I would make a quick exit.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many0 -
Doesn't exactly help on the sovereignty issue though?TOPPING said:I think EEA/EFTA is going to have to be the way forward. Call it interim, call it transitional, whatever works but it both satisfies those who want out, and satisfies those who want in.
Who wouldn't be happy? A small minority.
@Charles acutely noted that marketed as a free trade association (for it is that), it might receive less opposition.
My own view of its likely acceptance is that it is still a big ask. But of all the bonkers, pledge u-turning, policy-ditching, rudderless ship shenanigans we have had of late, this will be small fry.
Or on immigration.
I'd suggest therefore that those unhappy would be more than a small minority?0 -
Agree totally.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.
The more I read the guff spouted by the likes of Cable the more certain I am that we need to just get out asap.
None of these people (Cable, Clarke, Heseltine, Blair, Clegg etc) have ever had one doom laden prediction about the Euro/EU come true, why on earth they have any credibility is beyond me.
Lord Lawson is right, trying to negotiate is a waste of time, just accept that WTO it is and move on.0 -
The EU is already far beyond the US in centralising powers and I certainly don't see them surrendering them as part of their planned federalisation. Federalism is a poor form of democracy and even in the US it doesn't work well for many people.Beverley_C said:
Indeed, but I think we need to move to a different stage of democracy. The US system involved states giving up independence in a Federal system, yet they still have a lot of authority and democracy. I think we need to move more that way. A Federal EU would not be a bad thing IMOMorris_Dancer said:Mrs C, whilst I appreciate your honesty, do I find it saddening that you think a country should give away its democratic self-government.
Yes, the current (domestic political) situation is deeply uninspiring. That's a problem with the current leadership, not with democracy, in the same way a bad king doesn't make the system of monarchy worthless.
It's a lot easier to give up rights and power than it is to achieve them in the first place, or to reclaim them once abandoned.0 -
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I am sure that that's the thinking. It is sound, as far as it goes, but obviously is at substantial risk of being caught out by Events. Mind you, so is Corbyn's current ludicrously high approval rating.0 -
Mr. G, history ought not be neglected. It's full of lessons that can be learnt without suffering them directly.
Mrs C, there's no proposal for such a thing, though. I don't just mean in over/covert terms, I mean the EU drags power to the centre, it doesn't devolve it or have any wish to do so. Not only that, there's no European demos, despite the mythologising of some ideologues.
A Yorkshireman might consider himself the countryman of a Lancastrian or Scotsman, or even Irishman. But a Slovenian? A Greek? An Italian?
The scale, culture, demographics, economies, histories and societies of the varying states of Europe are not suited to be be a single country and not unified by being 'one people'. Not only that, this very diversity is not a bad thing.
I do, however, appreciate you being honest about your federalism.0 -
Says the man who spends his time talking about mince and turnips....malcolmg said:
Sounds more like a bunch of fannies to me, your idea of "class" is a bit skewed methinks. You need to get out more and meet real people, you have more than a touch of the Theresa's.Mortimer said:
Better class of wedding in Dulwich, clearly...malcolmg said:
sounds like a weird wedding to me, if anyone came up to me at a wedding and started talking mince about the Tories I would make a quick exit.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many0 -
I think that our democracy works pretty well. I see no advantage in transferring power to supranational institutions.Beverley_C said:
Indeed, but I think we need to move to a different stage of democracy. The US system involved states giving up independence in a Federal system, yet they still have a lot of authority and democracy. I think we need to move more that way. A Federal EU would not be a bad thing IMOMorris_Dancer said:Mrs C, whilst I appreciate your honesty, do I find it saddening that you think a country should give away its democratic self-government.
Yes, the current (domestic political) situation is deeply uninspiring. That's a problem with the current leadership, not with democracy, in the same way a bad king doesn't make the system of monarchy worthless.
It's a lot easier to give up rights and power than it is to achieve them in the first place, or to reclaim them once abandoned.0 -
O/T Tennis: Today I'm backing Sam QUERREY to beat Kevin Anderson in a match between two big servers. There'll be plenty of aces in this match and short service games. But of the two, I would make QUERREY the favourite. He's won 7 of their 12 previous meetings and unlike his opponent he has won a fast court title this season. 6/5 is available with Bet Victor and 11/10 elsewhere. I'd make QUERREY 8/11 favourite.
Last 2 previous selections lost. RUBLEV was 2-1 up but developed a stomach/abdominal injury which hampered his performance towards the end. Fought valiantly though. BAGHDATIS was brushed aside in the first set.
0 -
The behaviour of the Conservatives over the last few years have pushed me leftwards and convinced me that the current centre right are a bunch of self-obsessed, delusional, vain, glory-seeking incompetent halfwits.Casino_Royale said:
Why should we care what you think?Beverley_C said:
I would not even consider voting Tory if JRM was the leader. I want to go forwards to the future, not backwards to the past.foxinsoxuk said:JRM is like Boris, but with less piffle. He is a posho, but like Boris is comfortable in his skin in a way that Dave Cameron occasionally got wrong. He is intelligent articulate and charming.
His politics are a century out of date, and it is that that would lose dozens of seats. Still better than May, though.
You haven't said anything vaguely Conservative or centre-right for years, and your posts are mostly full of childish smiley faces and thumbs-up.
What is there to say these days that is "Conservative"? It appears to have become a regressive, isolationist, exclusionary philosophy - all the things opposite to my beliefs
Edit: Sorry, I forgot....
0 -
-
He could always asks Mrs May what can happen to that.....Richard_Nabavi said:
Corbyn's current ludicrously high approval rating.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.0 -
Reposting in case some missed it - an interesting analysis of options that eschews 'Soft' and 'Hard' slogans:
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2017/07/06/a-uk-eu-customs-union-an-option-most-of-us-could-live-with/0 -
I think you've just moved leftwards, and so you realise that you have nothing left in common with the centre-right.Beverley_C said:
The behaviour of the Conservatives over the last few years have pushed me leftwards and convinced me that the current centre right are a bunch of self-obsessed, delusional, vain, glory-seeking incompetent halfwits.Casino_Royale said:
Why should we care what you think?Beverley_C said:
I would not even consider voting Tory if JRM was the leader. I want to go forwards to the future, not backwards to the past.foxinsoxuk said:JRM is like Boris, but with less piffle. He is a posho, but like Boris is comfortable in his skin in a way that Dave Cameron occasionally got wrong. He is intelligent articulate and charming.
His politics are a century out of date, and it is that that would lose dozens of seats. Still better than May, though.
You haven't said anything vaguely Conservative or centre-right for years, and your posts are mostly full of childish smiley faces and thumbs-up.
What is there to say these days that is "Conservative"? It appears to have become a regressive, isolationist, exclusionary philosophy - all the things opposite to my beliefs
Edit: Sorry, I forgot....0 -
Mr. Manson, cheers. Bad luck with Rublev.
Mrs C, the Conservatives are currently deeply uninspiring.
But an election isn't a referendum on whether you like a party or not. It's a choice between them. I'll take deeply uninspiring over unilateralist self-declared friend of Hezbollah every day of the week.
[If I were in a different sort of seat I might view things differently, but it's a red-blue marginal, so I don't].0 -
You trying to say talking about Brexit is better than discussing real food products now. What university did you go to , Trumpton.Mortimer said:
Says the man who spends his time talking about mince and turnips....malcolmg said:
Sounds more like a bunch of fannies to me, your idea of "class" is a bit skewed methinks. You need to get out more and meet real people, you have more than a touch of the Theresa's.Mortimer said:
Better class of wedding in Dulwich, clearly...malcolmg said:
sounds like a weird wedding to me, if anyone came up to me at a wedding and started talking mince about the Tories I would make a quick exit.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many0 -
Apols if posted before - Prof Curtice sums up where we are on opinion on Brexit post the GE:
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/has-the-election-seen-a-change-in-attitudes-towards-brexit/0 -
I think we got a hint this year that honeymoon periods don't conjure up electoral advantages if the fundamentals are wrong. In short, you get found out.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I think May is broken. Every day she stays the Tories take on more damage that they then have less time to recover from.
If you can't find Mr Right, you should at least find Mrs Not Completely Broken to tide you over.0 -
I don't think they have a Conservative Association at Trumpton, they have a strong affiliation to the FBU, or so I gather!malcolmg said:
You trying to say talking about Brexit is better than discussing real food products now. What university did you go to , Trumpton.Mortimer said:
Says the man who spends his time talking about mince and turnips....malcolmg said:
Sounds more like a bunch of fannies to me, your idea of "class" is a bit skewed methinks. You need to get out more and meet real people, you have more than a touch of the Theresa's.Mortimer said:
Better class of wedding in Dulwich, clearly...malcolmg said:
sounds like a weird wedding to me, if anyone came up to me at a wedding and started talking mince about the Tories I would make a quick exit.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many0 -
I talk about Brexit very frequently in work-related situations - it is absolutely integral to what we do and what our clients do. I have never pretended to have a handle on public opinion, I just express my own thoughts and report the views that I hear - which, among the clients I talk to, are overwhelmingly negative to Brexit. They bring it up all the time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Which in all honesty is why I don't think you have a balanced view of public opinion. I can't go two days without someone at work talking about Brexit. And it is certainly not me who instigates it. As a consultant I am hugely aware that my position could be at risk if I upset the wrong people so I am extremely circumspect about my views. Even when the heated discussions get started I keep my opinions to myself. I save the arguments for on here.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.
I would say that amongst those I work with opinion is pretty much evenly split in terms of how they voted - at least as far as I can gather. But the idea that people don't talk about this almost all the time is quite alien to my experience.
I don't have these conversations at social events - there are other things to talk about. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think that people at weddings want to hear my views on the subject and I am not sure that I want to hear theirs.0 -
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.0 -
No, I am stating that as a matter of fact when the UK leaves the single market it will no longer be a part of the single market.nigel4england said:
Are you suggesting that once we leave the single market we will never, ever trade with the EU again? Sorry if I have misread it but that's the way it comes across to meSouthamObserver said:
That involves removing ourselves from the single market.Casino_Royale said:
We are not seeking to remove ourselves from that market. We are seeking to remove ourselves from political union.SouthamObserver said:
Surely we aspire to something more than national survival.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
The difference between the UK and every country on earth is that we are the only one currently seeking to remove ourselves from a market of which we have been an integral part for over 40 years and which accounts for well over 40% of all our exports.
0 -
Fixed it for ye!Mortimer said:
Says the man who spends his time talking about mince and about turnips....malcolmg said:
Sounds more like a bunch of fannies to me, your idea of "class" is a bit skewed methinks. You need to get out more and meet real people, you have more than a touch of the Theresa's.Mortimer said:
Better class of wedding in Dulwich, clearly...malcolmg said:
sounds like a weird wedding to me, if anyone came up to me at a wedding and started talking mince about the Tories I would make a quick exit.SouthamObserver said:
I never, ever have these kinds of conversation with people. I'd worry they would edge away from me nervously if I started them up.Mortimer said:Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many0 -
Is Jezza up for forming a national government with Mother Theresa?0
-
Not sure that that is necessary when the World Service Annual Review 2016 suggests that the audience reach has increased by 50% since 2010.rural_voter said:
Ireland spends 0.5% of GDP on defence. Austria and Switzerland 0.8%. Finland and Sweden ~1.5%. None of them spend 2%.dyedwoolie said:
They should be honest and call it 2.7% of GDP on interfering.another_richard said:
Britain seems to be the only country which pays both the 2% on Defence and the 0.7% on Overseas Aid.Andy_Cooke said:
Given what it does - increase UK influence and contribute to reducing unrest and trouble before they flare up - we could go further down the same route and free up even more cash if we slash Armed Forces expenditure by reducing them to a Homeland Defence role only.Alanbrooke said:
without it we could pay for free higher educationfoxinsoxuk said:
Without it we might have the popularity of Iran...Alanbrooke said:So despite spending a huge wodge on Foreign aid were seen as no better than anyone else
spot the budget saving
we might even try training some doctors for a change
If that's the road we want to take.
It doesn't seem to make us popular.
Perhaps they should be reduced to the same levels as Germany.
Defence ain't about defence and aid ain't about the unfortunate.
I'd support a UK cut to ~1%.
In terms of UK reputation, surely far better to use scarce resources to restore the funding of the World Service and British Council?
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmfaff/572/57206.htm
"The Service estimates that its total annual audience has increased
from 166 million in 2010-11 to 246 million in 2015-16, exceeding its forecasts.
The Service predicted significant reductions in its audiences in forecasts it prepared
in 2011 and 2012. Actual audiences have been higher as the Service has invested more
in digital and television services than it originally expected, and it has cut back on the
reductions it planned for short-wave radio. "
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/review_report_research/world_service/bbc_world_service.pdf
0 -
OT. Interesting ad for Absolut (sort of). I like it. It represents everything Brexit doesn't. (BBH the agency that gave us Levi Laundrette and others)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbaY0sHonZ40 -
More important, none of them have ever been a part of the single market and so have never had economies predicated on being a part of it.edmundintokyo said:
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.
0 -
I think he's right - Leave/Remain probably hasn't changed much but confidence in the government's ability to deliver Leave has certainly fallen. What a balls up.CarlottaVance said:Apols if posted before - Prof Curtice sums up where we are on opinion on Brexit post the GE:
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/has-the-election-seen-a-change-in-attitudes-towards-brexit/0 -
Yes, Theresa is starting to cut a forlorn and desperate figure. Reaching out to Jezza seems like a grotesque parody of Gordon's 'Government of all the talents'. The thing I fear for most though is Brexit. With the government paralysed, we just don't seem to have enough time. Redesigning our relationship with Europe and implementing it within eighteen months was always going to be an 'aggressive timeline'. And I know he's doing his absolute very best, but Liam's trade agreements seem at best nascent. Theresa made a terrible blunder doing Article 50 when she did. This should have been a long-term project, and she should have waited at least ten years.0
-
There are no good options. Theresa May's catastophic blunders have screwed up the party's position, and more importantly the country's position. The Article 50 clock ticking is a major complication, and I think that is probably tipping the balance towards her staying on as being the least bad option.Jonathan said:
I think we got a hint this year that honeymoon periods don't conjure up electoral advantages if the fundamentals are wrong. In short, you get found out.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I think May is broken. Every day she stays the Tories take on more damage that they then have less time to recover from.
If you can't find Mr Right, you should at least find Mrs Not Completely Broken to tide you over.0 -
Things started going wrong the weekend after the referendum when Boris (and everyone else) went missing and it's been getting worse ever since.houndtang said:
I think he's right - Leave/Remain probably hasn't changed much but confidence in the government's ability to deliver Leave has certainly fallen. What a balls up.CarlottaVance said:Apols if posted before - Prof Curtice sums up where we are on opinion on Brexit post the GE:
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/has-the-election-seen-a-change-in-attitudes-towards-brexit/
Tories = Spanners!!!0 -
That's a very good article, if only for the chart showing the pros and cons of the different scenarios.CarlottaVance said:Reposting in case some missed it - an interesting analysis of options that eschews 'Soft' and 'Hard' slogans:
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2017/07/06/a-uk-eu-customs-union-an-option-most-of-us-could-live-with/0 -
A smarter politician than May, less in hoc to proponents of extreme Brexit, would now have the opportunity to drive a permanent wedge between many Labour MPs and the party's leadership while also putting the UK in a much better position to negotiate a decent, sustainable Brexit deal.GIN1138 said:Is Jezza up for forming a national government with Mother Theresa?
0 -
Right, I wonder what the precedents even are for rapidly unrolling a FTA. There must be some if you go way back, but modern trade is on a totally different scale.SouthamObserver said:
More important, none of them have ever been a part of the single market and so have never had economies predicated on being a part of it.edmundintokyo said:
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.0 -
How would the existing EFTA members feel about the UK joing their cosy club of small countries? EFTA would be transformed and the existing members might be wary of being overshadowed. I would have thought that for that reason temporary membership of EFTA would not be acceptable. It is not clear to me that it is possible to be outside the EU yet inside the customs union - Norway is in EFTA and the EEA but not the CU - witness the customs checks at the border with Sweden.TOPPING said:I think EEA/EFTA is going to have to be the way forward. Call it interim, call it transitional, whatever works but it both satisfies those who want out, and satisfies those who want in.
Who wouldn't be happy? A small minority.
@Charles acutely noted that marketed as a free trade association (for it is that), it might receive less opposition.
My own view of its likely acceptance is that it is still a big ask. But of all the bonkers, pledge u-turning, policy-ditching, rudderless ship shenanigans we have had of late, this will be small fry.0 -
Fox's trade deals are the least of the UK's worries. They will essentially be concluded on the terms dictated by the other side of the table. The only issue we will face is whether to agree to them or not.Stark_Dawning said:Yes, Theresa is starting to cut a forlorn and desperate figure. Reaching out to Jezza seems like a grotesque parody of Gordon's 'Government of all the talents'. The thing I fear for most though is Brexit. With the government paralysed, we just don't seem to have enough time. Redesigning our relationship with Europe and implementing it within eighteen months was always going to be an 'aggressive timeline'. And I know he's doing his absolute very best, but Liam's trade agreements seem at best nascent. Theresa made a terrible blunder doing Article 50 when she did. This should have been a long-term project, and she should have waited at least ten years.
0 -
Mr. Nabavi, yeah. Sad that May screwed it up so much and that Corbyn remains.0
-
If the younger generation want lower hosue prices then they should campaign for higher interest rates.
High interest rates in the 1970s kept house prices lower than they would otherwise be.
Alternatively, in the 1950s and 60s house prices were kept even lower by restrictions on mortgage lending. Lending was rationed. Once lending restrictions were lifted house prices boomed. So we could return to mortgage rationing.0 -
And the single market is a lot more than an FTA.edmundintokyo said:
Right, I wonder what the precedents even are for rapidly unrolling a FTA. There must be some if you go way back, but modern trade is on a totally different scale.SouthamObserver said:
More important, none of them have ever been a part of the single market and so have never had economies predicated on being a part of it.edmundintokyo said:
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.
0 -
Yep - Leave was the right decision, unfortunately placed in the hands of the wrong people.GIN1138 said:
Things started going wrong the weekend after the referendum when Boris (and everyone else) went missing and it's been getting worse ever since.houndtang said:
I think he's right - Leave/Remain probably hasn't changed much but confidence in the government's ability to deliver Leave has certainly fallen. What a balls up.CarlottaVance said:Apols if posted before - Prof Curtice sums up where we are on opinion on Brexit post the GE:
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/has-the-election-seen-a-change-in-attitudes-towards-brexit/
Tories = Spanners!!!0 -
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.Richard_Nabavi said:
There are no good options. Theresa May's catastophic blunders have screwed up the party's position, and more importantly the country's position. The Article 50 clock ticking is a major complication, and I think that is probably tipping the balance towards her staying on as being the least bad option.Jonathan said:
I think we got a hint this year that honeymoon periods don't conjure up electoral advantages if the fundamentals are wrong. In short, you get found out.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I think May is broken. Every day she stays the Tories take on more damage that they then have less time to recover from.
If you can't find Mr Right, you should at least find Mrs Not Completely Broken to tide you over.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
0 -
David Davis would be a decent Michael Howard figure, IMO.Jonathan said:
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.Richard_Nabavi said:
There are no good options. Theresa May's catastophic blunders have screwed up the party's position, and more importantly the country's position. The Article 50 clock ticking is a major complication, and I think that is probably tipping the balance towards her staying on as being the least bad option.Jonathan said:
I think we got a hint this year that honeymoon periods don't conjure up electoral advantages if the fundamentals are wrong. In short, you get found out.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I think May is broken. Every day she stays the Tories take on more damage that they then have less time to recover from.
If you can't find Mr Right, you should at least find Mrs Not Completely Broken to tide you over.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.0 -
Mr. Jonathan, the blues need to either unite or axe May. It's a little like the Brown situation.
I wish John Hutton had become Labour leader. He really seemed to have his head screwed on right.0 -
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.Jonathan said:It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.0 -
Yes, good observation. It put out a horrible message - objective achieved for the furtherance of our careers now let's have a holiday. Boris and co. should have been on the airwaves continuously in the immediate aftermath, proclaiming that 'the hard work starts here' and 'this is merely the end of the beginning'. Instead an air of vagueness and drift was created that persists to this day.GIN1138 said:
Things started going wrong the weekend after the referendum when Boris (and everyone else) went missing and it's been getting worse ever since.houndtang said:
I think he's right - Leave/Remain probably hasn't changed much but confidence in the government's ability to deliver Leave has certainly fallen. What a balls up.CarlottaVance said:Apols if posted before - Prof Curtice sums up where we are on opinion on Brexit post the GE:
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/has-the-election-seen-a-change-in-attitudes-towards-brexit/
Tories = Spanners!!!0 -
Mr. Dawning, indeed. It also smacked of Boris being too clever by half, siding with Leave to become PM after Cameron left, then actually winning the referendum when he never wanted to.
The man's a full-blown idiot.0 -
The irony is that Theresa May seemed to be the only one that at least had a clear plan for what she wanted to do with Brexit (one can argue whether it was a sensible plan) but the electorate rejected it...Stark_Dawning said:
Yes, good observation. It put out a horrible message - objective achieved for the furtherance of our careers now let's have a holiday. Boris and co. should have been on the airwaves continuously in the immediate aftermath, proclaiming that 'the hard work starts here' and 'this is merely the end of the beginning'. Instead an air of vagueness and drift was created that persists to this day.GIN1138 said:
Things started going wrong the weekend after the referendum when Boris (and everyone else) went missing and it's been getting worse ever since.houndtang said:
I think he's right - Leave/Remain probably hasn't changed much but confidence in the government's ability to deliver Leave has certainly fallen. What a balls up.CarlottaVance said:Apols if posted before - Prof Curtice sums up where we are on opinion on Brexit post the GE:
http://whatukthinks.org/eu/has-the-election-seen-a-change-in-attitudes-towards-brexit/
Tories = Spanners!!!0 -
...and if not Hutton Hoey or Field. Then we could have two Tory Party leadersMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, the blues need to either unite or axe May. It's a little like the Brown situation.
I wish John Hutton had become Labour leader. He really seemed to have his head screwed on right.0 -
Mr. Roger, infinitely better than a friend of Hamas as Leader of the Opposition.0
-
@PippaCrerar: Even the Vote Leave chief thinks this is a *seriously* bad idea https://twitter.com/odysseanproject/status/8843540379567185930
-
Meanwhile, in today's "take back control" news...
@andybell5news: Downing St confirms ECJ could have role in "implementation" period after #Brexit0 -
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.Jonathan said:It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.0 -
I would've thought you'd agree with an "implementation" period... The longer the better?Scott_P said:Meanwhile, in today's "take back control" news...
@andybell5news: Downing St confirms ECJ could have role in "implementation" period after #Brexit0 -
-
-
For those without the time to read it a Red White and Blue Brexit (the May option) will lead to a proliferation of food banks and bankruptciesRichard_Nabavi said:
That's a very good article, if only for the chart showing the pros and cons of the different scenarios.CarlottaVance said:Reposting in case some missed it - an interesting analysis of options that eschews 'Soft' and 'Hard' slogans:
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2017/07/06/a-uk-eu-customs-union-an-option-most-of-us-could-live-with/0 -
Maybe the Vote Leave chief should have been a bit clearer before the referendum as to which particular flavour of Brexit Vote Leave were advocating.Scott_P said:@PippaCrerar: Even the Vote Leave chief thinks this is a *seriously* bad idea https://twitter.com/odysseanproject/status/884354037956718593
0 -
-
The next few years is looking like something I can take a stab at now, underpinned by the twin metastabilities of Tory grip on power and Corbyn grip on his own position.
May's survival is dependent on Brexit progressing, and if she looks like a barrier to the negotiation she is gone. Unfortunately, she is a plodder, decent when A50 needed to be prepared or extraditing a hate preacher, but not nimble enough to work against the clock on a GE campaign or with Brexit. She will be gone this year, perhaps a month or two later than the ideal timetable, and Davis will succeed her. The Tories will remain metastable.
Brexit will be some degree of bad to terrible or could collapse entirely, depending primarily on how ordered it is. There will be large scale public unrest. Davis will be gone by 2020 - if Brexit was merely bad, Boris has a chance, if terrible a Cameroon, perhaps Ruth, will be favoured. The grip on power will remain metastable.
The Tories will cling on until 2022 no matter what, with the DUP sticking around, sometimes used, sometimes distanced. If we assume by elections and losses in line within the ageing of the very comfortably off, they will just about get through, their metastability battered but unbowed by Brexit, economy, leadership changes, poisonous blamestorming and terrible morale. Fundamentally, the Conservatives end up with little more than a confidence and supply arrangement with themselves.
Labour's troubles will not go away, but their disunity will be minor news. The battles over process remains and the McDonnell amendment, for instance, will get gummed up. There is a very good chance Corbyn will fight GE22, but if events do go to prevent this, a soft left move is likely, with Lewis or Thornberry both possible.
I think the polls will show Labour somewhat ahead going into GE22 with the shine quickly off the third Tory leader of the term, but with Corbyn PM as the theme, it will not be a foregone conclusion.
0 -
He was very clear...Richard_Nabavi said:Maybe the Vote Leave chief should have been a bit clearer before the referendum as to which particular flavour of Brexit Vote Leave were advocating.
https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/7470005842266071040 -
But we will still trade with that market, even on WTO terms?SouthamObserver said:
No, I am stating that as a matter of fact when the UK leaves the single market it will no longer be a part of the single market.nigel4england said:
Are you suggesting that once we leave the single market we will never, ever trade with the EU again? Sorry if I have misread it but that's the way it comes across to meSouthamObserver said:
That involves removing ourselves from the single market.Casino_Royale said:
We are not seeking to remove ourselves from that market. We are seeking to remove ourselves from political union.SouthamObserver said:
Surely we aspire to something more than national survival.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
The difference between the UK and every country on earth is that we are the only one currently seeking to remove ourselves from a market of which we have been an integral part for over 40 years and which accounts for well over 40% of all our exports.0 -
Got to agree that this would be best for the Conservative Party in the medium-to-long term.Jonathan said:
New leader, snap election asap. Do or die.Casino_Royale said:
Well, we're supposed to be asking you now..Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
What do you suggest?
Hanging on never works. You may fear Corbyn, but you will only gain a few months at the cost of your party by dragging this out.
They won't do it, though.
- May hanging on with her authority demolished makes her look bad, the Conservatives look bad, weakens the country, and, as Major found out when his authority looked damaged, redoubles the propensity of the media to view everything through the lens of "all bad things are down to the Government; all good things would have happened anyway." Which reinforces the vicious circle.
- A lot of difficult things will be happening over the next couple of years (Brexit outstanding among them), and whatever compromises are found will have bad things (down to the Government as above) mixed in with any good. The bad things will be a massive stick to beat the Conservatives with for many years to come.
- It's hugely unlikely that anything will spontaneously happen to save the Conservatives over the next few years, wishful thinking notwithstanding - at least not under May.
- Changing leaders will redouble the call for another election for a mandate, which will likely see the Conservatives hit and knocked out of Government. The longer it goes before the election, the worse it is liable to be.
This leads to desperate out-of-the-box thinking like David Herdson's "abdicate to Corbyn without an election" idea - which, while a good attempt at brainstorming suffers from the issue that deliberate abdication will be held against the Conservatives by all anti-Corbyn voters and many pro-Conservative voters. (Handing over to the Lib Dems for a Coalition on the basis of giving up Disproportional Representation and promising a referendum on the final Brexit deal, with the Lib Dem Leader as PM is equally out-of-the-box thinking, but more likely to keep unfettered Corbynism away for good - but equally unthinkable for Conservatives).
The least bad option is to find someone - almost anyone - as an alternative leader, and roll the dice again. The odds are stacked against an outright win for the Conservatives, but they're unlikely to get better than this, and the loss would likely be far less than it would get the longer it takes.
Not going to happen, though.0 -
Something is going to have to give. Not sure where it will be but this might be the way to upset the smallest number of people.rkrkrk said:
Doesn't exactly help on the sovereignty issue though?TOPPING said:I think EEA/EFTA is going to have to be the way forward. Call it interim, call it transitional, whatever works but it both satisfies those who want out, and satisfies those who want in.
Who wouldn't be happy? A small minority.
@Charles acutely noted that marketed as a free trade association (for it is that), it might receive less opposition.
My own view of its likely acceptance is that it is still a big ask. But of all the bonkers, pledge u-turning, policy-ditching, rudderless ship shenanigans we have had of late, this will be small fry.
Or on immigration.
I'd suggest therefore that those unhappy would be more than a small minority?0 -
Interesting predictions Mystic Rata.Pro_Rata said:The next few years is looking like something I can take a stab at now, underpinned by the twin metastabilities of Tory grip on power and Corbyn grip on his own position.
May's survival is dependent on Brexit progressing, and if she looks like a barrier to the negotiation she is gone. Unfortunately, she is a plodder, decent when A50 needed to be prepared or extraditing a hate preacher, but not nimble enough to work against the clock on a GE campaign or with Brexit. She will be gone this year, perhaps a month or two later than the ideal timetable, and Davis will succeed her. The Tories will remain metastable.
Brexit will be some degree of bad to terrible or could collapse entirely, depending primarily on how ordered it is. There will be large scale public unrest. Davis will be gone by 2020 - if Brexit was merely bad, Boris has a chance, if terrible a Cameroon, perhaps Ruth, will be favoured. The grip on power will remain metastable.
The Tories will cling on until 2022 no matter what, with the DUP sticking around, sometimes used, sometimes distanced. If we assume by elections and losses in line within the ageing of the very comfortably off, they will just about get through, their metastability battered but unbowed by Brexit, economy, leadership changes, poisonous blamestorming and terrible morale. Fundamentally, the Conservatives end up with little more than a confidence and supply arrangement with themselves.
Labour's troubles will not go away, but their disunity will be minor news. The battles over process remains and the McDonnell amendment, for instance, will get gummed up. There is a very good chance Corbyn will fight GE22, but if events do go to prevent this, a soft left move is likely, with Lewis or Thornberry both possible.
I think the polls will show Labour somewhat ahead going into GE22 with the shine quickly off the third Tory leader of the term, but with Corbyn PM as the theme, it will not be a foregone conclusion.
Personally I don't know what's going to happen next week nevermind in 2022...
0 -
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.Jonathan said:
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.Jonathan said:It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.0 -
That is a starkly concerning statement when Mr Howard's recent outings have included advocating potential military action against Spain over their posturing over Gibraltar. For what it is worth your statement regarding Mr Howard and Mr Davis is probably, although unfortunately, accurate.GIN1138 said:
David Davis would be a decent Michael Howard figure, IMO.Jonathan said:
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.Richard_Nabavi said:
There are no good options. Theresa May's catastophic blunders have screwed up the party's position, and more importantly the country's position. The Article 50 clock ticking is a major complication, and I think that is probably tipping the balance towards her staying on as being the least bad option.Jonathan said:
I think we got a hint this year that honeymoon periods don't conjure up electoral advantages if the fundamentals are wrong. In short, you get found out.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I think May is broken. Every day she stays the Tories take on more damage that they then have less time to recover from.
If you can't find Mr Right, you should at least find Mrs Not Completely Broken to tide you over.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.0 -
Same as if Corbyn gets in thenRoger said:
For those without the time to read it a Red White and Blue Brexit (the May option) will lead to a proliferation of food banks and bankruptciesRichard_Nabavi said:
That's a very good article, if only for the chart showing the pros and cons of the different scenarios.CarlottaVance said:Reposting in case some missed it - an interesting analysis of options that eschews 'Soft' and 'Hard' slogans:
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2017/07/06/a-uk-eu-customs-union-an-option-most-of-us-could-live-with/0 -
Of course. It will just be more expensive and more time consuming than it is now.nigel4england said:
But we will still trade with that market, even on WTO terms?SouthamObserver said:
No, I am stating that as a matter of fact when the UK leaves the single market it will no longer be a part of the single market.nigel4england said:
Are you suggesting that once we leave the single market we will never, ever trade with the EU again? Sorry if I have misread it but that's the way it comes across to meSouthamObserver said:
That involves removing ourselves from the single market.Casino_Royale said:
We are not seeking to remove ourselves from that market. We are seeking to remove ourselves from political union.SouthamObserver said:
Surely we aspire to something more than national survival.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
The difference between the UK and every country on earth is that we are the only one currently seeking to remove ourselves from a market of which we have been an integral part for over 40 years and which accounts for well over 40% of all our exports.
0 -
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.Beverley_C said:
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.Morris_Dancer said:Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.0 -
We're talking about Howard from 2003 to 2005 not 2017 Howard.Mexicanpete said:
That is a starkly concerning statement when Mr Howard's recent outings have included advocating potential military action against Spain over their posturing over Gibraltar. For what it is worth your statement regarding Mr Howard and Mr Davis is probably, although unfortunately, accurate.GIN1138 said:
David Davis would be a decent Michael Howard figure, IMO.Jonathan said:
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.Richard_Nabavi said:
There are no good options. Theresa May's catastophic blunders have screwed up the party's position, and more importantly the country's position. The Article 50 clock ticking is a major complication, and I think that is probably tipping the balance towards her staying on as being the least bad option.Jonathan said:
I think we got a hint this year that honeymoon periods don't conjure up electoral advantages if the fundamentals are wrong. In short, you get found out.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I think May is broken. Every day she stays the Tories take on more damage that they then have less time to recover from.
If you can't find Mr Right, you should at least find Mrs Not Completely Broken to tide you over.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you. 0 -
The Euratom Treaty was extensively amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, though it continues to have a separate existence from the EU Treaties. Most significantly, Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, as amended, now provides that “Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (the Article that sets out the procedure for EU withdrawal) … shall apply to this Treaty.”Scott_P said:@PippaCrerar: Even the Vote Leave chief thinks this is a *seriously* bad idea https://twitter.com/odysseanproject/status/884354037956718593
.....Withdrawal from Euratom was therefore not a question of stubborn absolutism on the part of the Prime Minister over submission to the jurisdiction of the CJEU. It was, rather, an inevitable legal consequence of the decision of the British people to withdraw from the EU. The only legal means of effecting withdrawal is by serving an Article 50 notice, which, as illustrated above, also has the automatic effect of withdrawing from Euratom.
http://brexitcentral.com/cant-pick-choose-bits-eu-membership-like-brexit-must-come-withdrawal-euratom/0 -
What does New Zealand have?edmundintokyo said:
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.0 -
For both sides.SouthamObserver said:
Of course. It will just be more expensive and more time consuming than it is now.nigel4england said:
But we will still trade with that market, even on WTO terms?SouthamObserver said:
No, I am stating that as a matter of fact when the UK leaves the single market it will no longer be a part of the single market.nigel4england said:
Are you suggesting that once we leave the single market we will never, ever trade with the EU again? Sorry if I have misread it but that's the way it comes across to meSouthamObserver said:
That involves removing ourselves from the single market.Casino_Royale said:
We are not seeking to remove ourselves from that market. We are seeking to remove ourselves from political union.SouthamObserver said:
Surely we aspire to something more than national survival.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
The difference between the UK and every country on earth is that we are the only one currently seeking to remove ourselves from a market of which we have been an integral part for over 40 years and which accounts for well over 40% of all our exports.
The way you were portraying it is that we are removing ourselves from that market and will never trade with them again.0 -
I agree something will have to give.TOPPING said:
Something is going to have to give. Not sure where it will be but this might be the way to upset the smallest number of people.rkrkrk said:
Doesn't exactly help on the sovereignty issue though?TOPPING said:I think EEA/EFTA is going to have to be the way forward. Call it interim, call it transitional, whatever works but it both satisfies those who want out, and satisfies those who want in.
Who wouldn't be happy? A small minority.
@Charles acutely noted that marketed as a free trade association (for it is that), it might receive less opposition.
My own view of its likely acceptance is that it is still a big ask. But of all the bonkers, pledge u-turning, policy-ditching, rudderless ship shenanigans we have had of late, this will be small fry.
Or on immigration.
I'd suggest therefore that those unhappy would be more than a small minority?
But I can't see TM doing that. She has always prioritised immigration over the economy.
And I don't know if she would even be strong enough within her party to push through a shift in policy like this - even if she wanted to...0 -
Lots of agricultural commodities.Casino_Royale said:
What does New Zealand have?edmundintokyo said:
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.0 -
It was put to me (by people who know!!!!!) before the referendum that the EFTA option was "ridiculous" in that as you say, you couldn't have an economy the size of the UK in this peripheral group.PeterC said:
How would the existing EFTA members feel about the UK joing their cosy club of small countries? EFTA would be transformed and the existing members might be wary of being overshadowed. I would have thought that for that reason temporary membership of EFTA would not be acceptable. It is not clear to me that it is possible to be outside the EU yet inside the customs union - Norway is in EFTA and the EEA but not the CU - witness the customs checks at the border with Sweden.TOPPING said:I think EEA/EFTA is going to have to be the way forward. Call it interim, call it transitional, whatever works but it both satisfies those who want out, and satisfies those who want in.
Who wouldn't be happy? A small minority.
@Charles acutely noted that marketed as a free trade association (for it is that), it might receive less opposition.
My own view of its likely acceptance is that it is still a big ask. But of all the bonkers, pledge u-turning, policy-ditching, rudderless ship shenanigans we have had of late, this will be small fry.0 -
Presumably we'll have associate membership of Euratom like Switzerland and there won't be a problem?CarlottaVance said:
The Euratom Treaty was extensively amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, though it continues to have a separate existence from the EU Treaties. Most significantly, Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, as amended, now provides that “Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (the Article that sets out the procedure for EU withdrawal) … shall apply to this Treaty.”Scott_P said:@PippaCrerar: Even the Vote Leave chief thinks this is a *seriously* bad idea https://twitter.com/odysseanproject/status/884354037956718593
.....Withdrawal from Euratom was therefore not a question of stubborn absolutism on the part of the Prime Minister over submission to the jurisdiction of the CJEU. It was, rather, an inevitable legal consequence of the decision of the British people to withdraw from the EU. The only legal means of effecting withdrawal is by serving an Article 50 notice, which, as illustrated above, also has the automatic effect of withdrawing from Euratom.
http://brexitcentral.com/cant-pick-choose-bits-eu-membership-like-brexit-must-come-withdrawal-euratom/
Looks like another entirely made-up scare (this time trying to worry people with Cancer) from Continuity Remain...0 -
All three of them were Sid and DorisGIN1138 said:
We're talking about Howard from 2003 to 2005 not 2017 Howard.Mexicanpete said:
That is a starkly concerning statement when Mr Howard's recent outings have included advocating potential military action against Spain over their posturing over Gibraltar. For what it is worth your statement regarding Mr Howard and Mr Davis is probably, although unfortunately, accurate.GIN1138 said:
David Davis would be a decent Michael Howard figure, IMO.Jonathan said:
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.Richard_Nabavi said:
There are no good options. Theresa May's catastophic blunders have screwed up the party's position, and more importantly the country's position. The Article 50 clock ticking is a major complication, and I think that is probably tipping the balance towards her staying on as being the least bad option.Jonathan said:
I think we got a hint this year that honeymoon periods don't conjure up electoral advantages if the fundamentals are wrong. In short, you get found out.Richard_Nabavi said:
Because there's (probably) no election pending. If we were to switch leader, that won't magic up a majority, so exactly the same problems Theresa May has would attach themselves to, and screw up the reputation of, the new leader. You want to change leader at a time where you can get electoral advantage from the honeymoon period.Jonathan said:Stench of decay around May this morning.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
I think May is broken. Every day she stays the Tories take on more damage that they then have less time to recover from.
If you can't find Mr Right, you should at least find Mrs Not Completely Broken to tide you over.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.0 -
13.3% of their exports are of "concentrated milk". Does that mean cheese, do you think?Casino_Royale said:
What does New Zealand have?edmundintokyo said:
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.CornishJohn said:
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.FF43 said:For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.
http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/nzl/0 -
0
-
Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubry team up to lead a new cross-party group against hard Brexit
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/10/rebel-mps-form-cross-party-group-to-oppose-hard-brexit0 -
Thorpe is due to close end of 2018, the difficult to treat nuclear waste is due to be returned to Germany untreated, and ITER (according to the New Yorker) looks like a shambles. Why does it matter if we are in Euratom? Am I missing something?0
-
For the record, leaving Euratom would not be the end of the world.0
-
Is this the start of the new Liberal Party of Great Britain?HYUFD said:Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubry team up to lead a new cross-party group against hard Brexit
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/10/rebel-mps-form-cross-party-group-to-oppose-hard-brexit0 -
Hague and Howard, the 2001 general election loser or the 2005 general election loser, no thanks we may as well keep May for nowPeterC said:
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.Jonathan said:
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.Jonathan said:It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.0
