HYUFD said:

anothernick said:

dixiedean said:

stevef said:

Goodness me, Corbynistas might be happy now in their delusions, but if Corbyn ever got power he would toxify Labour for decades. And I say that as a non Blairite Labour voter.

Maybe. But predictions about Corbyn have generally been wrong so far.

In the 1970s it was widely expected that Thatcher would prove to be a disaster for the Tories. Too extreme they said. People would never accept her ideas. But Labour imploded and policies that once appeared extreme became mainstream. Corbyn may follow a similar trajectory.

I doubt Corbyn is another Attlee or Thatcher, more likely if he wins he will be another Heath and out after a term

It is over 40 years since a party did not get a second term, and indeed Wilson did win two consecutive elections, albeit both in 74. US incumbent presidents for a similar period have won second terms too. I think that winning a second term is very possible for Labour, indeed quite possibly with an increased majority. It takes a while for the wheels to fall off, and apparatchiks like McDonnell are often very good administrators.

How long can the far Left sustain this suspension of disbelief? Are the public so gullible?

Allan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Allan said:

philiph said:

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

Just to be clear, business cares about the Tories and the Tories care about business.

And no, Hard Brexit doesn't mean no deal, it means not being in the Single Market or Customs Union. It is another foolish designation from the continuity Remain campaigners. It doesn't help their argument but makes them feel better.

You've lost this business leader's vote.
https://twitter.com/Skapinker/status/907177542616064000

Indeed, we could revert to methods of business that we used in the 1970s.

Alternatively we could trade from outside the single market, into a single market that has one set of standards, using the trading methods of the 2010s.

This "exporter" and manufacturer actually sold less than 8% of its goods into Europe before the Referendum. Worth about £10k of Profit after tax each year. The "business leader" should be more focused on why his business sells so little into Europe and get out and open new markets for his company. But he is 78 years old so may be a little long in the tooth for driving the company forward? He could always join young Vince's team with the Lib Dems.

And your solution is to make it harder for him to export to Europe. I am sure that this makes sense in your head, but I have to say I'm struggling with it.

He is failing to export significant amounts to Europe (EU27 being a part of that). He is worrying about a small part of his business and presenting his company as an exporting manufacturer. Maybe he needs to understand his business better?

My guess is that he understands it a whole lot better than you.

HYUFD said:

foxinsoxuk said:

HYUFD said:

anothernick said:

dixiedean said:

stevef said:

Goodness me, Corbynistas might be happy now in their delusions, but if Corbyn ever got power he would toxify Labour for decades. And I say that as a non Blairite Labour voter.

Maybe. But predictions about Corbyn have generally been wrong so far.

In the 1970s it was widely expected that Thatcher would prove to be a disaster for the Tories. Too extreme they said. People would never accept her ideas. But Labour imploded and policies that once appeared extreme became mainstream. Corbyn may follow a similar trajectory.

I doubt Corbyn is another Attlee or Thatcher, more likely if he wins he will be another Heath and out after a term

It is over 40 years since a party did not get a second term, and indeed Wilson did win two consecutive elections, albeit both in 74. US incumbent presidents for a similar period have won second terms too. I think that winning a second term is very possible for Labour, indeed quite possibly with an increased majority. It takes a while for the wheels to fall off, and apparatchiks like McDonnell are often very good administrators.

It is also almost 50 years since a party leader who lost his first general election won his second, that leader was Heath in 1970 and he was thrown out after a term.

Losing leaders rarely get a second chance in modern times, and indeed the only one who did was Neil Kinnock, who gained seats at both of his elections. Your set consists of n = 1. Mine is a bigger data set.

Jason said:

How long can the far Left sustain this suspension of disbelief? Are the public so gullible?

Perhaps there has been one of Callaghan's famous sea changes?

malcolmg said:

williamglenn said:

https://twitter.com/mattholehouse/status/907167236133195776

Can these clowns get any more deluded.

Oh yes, just wait.

SouthamObserver said:

Allan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Allan said:

philiph said:

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

Just to be clear, business cares about the Tories and the Tories care about business.

And no, Hard Brexit doesn't mean no deal, it means not being in the Single Market or Customs Union. It is another foolish designation from the continuity Remain campaigners. It doesn't help their argument but makes them feel better.

You've lost this business leader's vote.
https://twitter.com/Skapinker/status/907177542616064000

Indeed, we could revert to methods of business that we used in the 1970s.

Alternatively we could trade from outside the single market, into a single market that has one set of standards, using the trading methods of the 2010s.

This "exporter" and manufacturer actually sold less than 8% of its goods into Europe before the Referendum. Worth about £10k of Profit after tax each year. The "business leader" should be more focused on why his business sells so little into Europe and get out and open new markets for his company. But he is 78 years old so may be a little long in the tooth for driving the company forward? He could always join young Vince's team with the Lib Dems.

And your solution is to make it harder for him to export to Europe. I am sure that this makes sense in your head, but I have to say I'm struggling with it.

He is failing to export significant amounts to Europe (EU27 being a part of that). He is worrying about a small part of his business and presenting his company as an exporting manufacturer. Maybe he needs to understand his business better?

My guess is that he understands it a whole lot better than you.

Who would have time (as a business person) to make something up and send in a letter?

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The UK agreed to the timetable the EU proposed, but cannot now make the necessary progress for fear of bad headlines at home about caving into EU payment demands.

So you think we should agree to pay something more than the entire annual defence budget on the off chance that the EU might be nice to us?

Well, it's a view. I can't think that it's a very business-friendly view though. That money will come directly out of the UK economy.

Nope - I think we should accept that if we want to have a meaningful ongoing relationship with the EU, then we are going to have to pay a relatively large amount of money. If we do not have that relationship, the cost to the British economy - and to British business - will be a lot higher than anything we fork out.

So do you think we should agree to be blackmailed/extorted into writing a blank cheque in order to talk about trade?

We are not being blackmailed. We do not need to write a cheque to start talking about trade. We need to agree a process that will get us to a point where we make a series of payments in the future.

Currently the EU view is to get us to pay the maximum imaginable whether it is legally justified or not because we have no choice but to agree to it in their eyes. Do you think we should go ahead with that or not?

It's a reflection of the very weak negotiating position we are in, because thousands believed the lies of the Leave campaign.

foxinsoxuk said:

HYUFD said:

foxinsoxuk said:

HYUFD said:

anothernick said:

dixiedean said:

stevef said:

Goodness me, Corbynistas might be happy now in their delusions, but if Corbyn ever got power he would toxify Labour for decades. And I say that as a non Blairite Labour voter.

Maybe. But predictions about Corbyn have generally been wrong so far.

In the 1970s it was widely expected that Thatcher would prove to be a disaster for the Tories. Too extreme they said. People would never accept her ideas. But Labour imploded and policies that once appeared extreme became mainstream. Corbyn may follow a similar trajectory.

I doubt Corbyn is another Attlee or Thatcher, more likely if he wins he will be another Heath and out after a term

It is over 40 years since a party did not get a second term, and indeed Wilson did win two consecutive elections, albeit both in 74. US incumbent presidents for a similar period have won second terms too. I think that winning a second term is very possible for Labour, indeed quite possibly with an increased majority. It takes a while for the wheels to fall off, and apparatchiks like McDonnell are often very good administrators.

It is also almost 50 years since a party leader who lost his first general election won his second, that leader was Heath in 1970 and he was thrown out after a term.

Losing leaders rarely get a second chance in modern times, and indeed the only one who did was Neil Kinnock, who gained seats at both of his elections. Your set consists of n = 1. Mine is a bigger data set.

Kinnock also lost twice and most of his gains in voteshare came from the SDP not the Tories

Every PM since 1950 who was re elected won his first general election unlike Corbyn, even Attlee would probably have lost in 1940 his luck was the election being delayed until 1945

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

The UK agreed to the timetable the EU proposed, but cannot now make the necessary progress for fear of bad headlines at home about caving into EU payment demands.

So you think we should agree to pay something more than the entire annual defence budget on the off chance that the EU might be nice to us?

Well, it's a view. I can't think that it's a very business-friendly view though. That money will come directly out of the UK economy.

Nope - I think we should accept that if we want to have a meaningful ongoing relationship with the EU, then we are going to have to pay a relatively large amount of money. If we do not have that relationship, the cost to the British economy - and to British business - will be a lot higher than anything we fork out.

So do you think we should agree to be blackmailed/extorted into writing a blank cheque in order to talk about trade?

We are not being blackmailed. We do not need to write a cheque to start talking about trade. We need to agree a process that will get us to a point where we make a series of payments in the future.

Currently the EU view is to get us to pay the maximum imaginable whether it is legally justified or not because we have no choice but to agree to it in their eyes. Do you think we should go ahead with that or not?

The EU aren't thinking beyond making an example of the UK, pour encourages les autres.

They either want us to fold and stay, accept a chained deal where our hands are tied forever more with no say, or just fuck off.

The risk is that we decide to fuck off.

This might have a significant impact on who gets to be the Democrat's nominee for president, perhaps making it harder for a relative unknown like Obama was to emerge:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/10/california-could-jolt-2020-presidential-elections-242530

Seems Corbyn is just as muddled on the Single Market as anyone else is.

Oh dear.

SouthamObserver said:

Allan said:

SouthamObserver said:

Allan said:

philiph said:

williamglenn said:

Mortimer said:

Just to be clear, business cares about the Tories and the Tories care about business.

And no, Hard Brexit doesn't mean no deal, it means not being in the Single Market or Customs Union. It is another foolish designation from the continuity Remain campaigners. It doesn't help their argument but makes them feel better.

You've lost this business leader's vote.
https://twitter.com/Skapinker/status/907177542616064000

Indeed, we could revert to methods of business that we used in the 1970s.

Alternatively we could trade from outside the single market, into a single market that has one set of standards, using the trading methods of the 2010s.

This "exporter" and manufacturer actually sold less than 8% of its goods into Europe before the Referendum. Worth about £10k of Profit after tax each year. The "business leader" should be more focused on why his business sells so little into Europe and get out and open new markets for his company. But he is 78 years old so may be a little long in the tooth for driving the company forward? He could always join young Vince's team with the Lib Dems.

And your solution is to make it harder for him to export to Europe. I am sure that this makes sense in your head, but I have to say I'm struggling with it.

He is failing to export significant amounts to Europe (EU27 being a part of that). He is worrying about a small part of his business and presenting his company as an exporting manufacturer. Maybe he needs to understand his business better?

My guess is that he understands it a whole lot better than you.

Lacking a focus on the big issues and fretting over the minor is a sign of a bad business manager, but at 78 we should be generous and wish him a happy retirement.

Corbyn's position on Brexit seems to be that he hopes the issue will go away.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Corbyn's position on Brexit seems to be that he hopes the issue will go away.

‪Corbyn sounds like a man still deciding whether to ditch his mistress before his wife finds outs. ‬

Not that I have any experience of such a situation.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Corbyn's position on Brexit seems to be that he hopes the issue will go away.

A bit like Trident. Starting to see a pattern of a man split between what he actually thinks and maintaining a vaneer of moderation.

HYUFD said:

619 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Corbyn's position on Brexit seems to be that he hopes the issue will go away.

Most voters wants someone to just get a good deal and never talk of the whole mess ever again. And will blame whoever gets us a rubbish deal

That depends on what they consider a rubbish deal, most Remainers would consider that leaving the single market and customs union without FTAs in place, most Leavers paying billions to the EU and leaving free movement uncontrolled

Staying in the single market but leaving the EU itself would actually be a the worst of all worlds.

Id prefer to remain in the EU on those grounds, on the basis we can still go to the meetings and piss off the French.

Someone's stolen Morris Dancer's idea.

https://twitter.com/thedailymash/status/907223496656334849

williamglenn said:

Allan said:

williamglenn said:

Allan said:

williamglenn said:

Allan said:

williamglenn said:

philiph said:

williamglenn said:

philiph said:

The result of the last 25 or so years in the single market has not helped a lot of our brethren, and I do believe they are entitled to a better life. The fact that the way they see of achieving it creates a new raft of issues isn't here or there. We will have to overcome them. That is our job. Quit the negativity and work towards solutions.

Is it 'the way they see of achieving it', or is it the way that a load of shyster ideologues have told them is the way to achieve it? My solution is to expose the shysters without remorse until they are run out of public life and then ask the people again.

That is only accepting the existence of one side of the balance sheet.

What is on the other side of the balance sheet? What are the benefits of leaving the EU that will improve these voters' lives?

Cheaper food once out of the CAP.

Give me an example of a good product that will be cheaper and explain why.

EU Tariffs = 33.5 per cent in dairy and 15 per cent on animal products. For individual products tariffs can be higher still. (Policy Exchange report 2017)

Do you think these tariffs apply to all imports from outside the EU? They don't.

You asked for examples of cheaper food once freed from EU tariffs. There is a big wide world out there if you are optimistic and look at life through a half full glass.

And you came back with a vague statement about tariffs instead of a concrete example of how leaving the EU will lower food prices.

Half the butter and over 60% of the cheese we consume is imported yet only 1% of those imports come from outside the EU. Why, when nations like New Zealand produce some of the worlds best and cheapest butter?

Because the EU imposes tariffs of €1,896 per tonne of butter.

@KatySearle: Labour source says Jeremy Corbyn's position on single market hasn't changed. Formal relationship doesn't exist. Wants best poss relationship

Scott_P said:

@KatySearle: Labour source says Jeremy Corbyn's position on single market hasn't changed. Formal relationship doesn't exist. Wants best poss relationship

So in other worlds, 'we ain't got the foggiest either'.

Or the mythical 'have your cake and eat it' option.

@PolhomeEditor: In same interview, Corbyn says UK could stay in the single market after Brexit AND that being in the single market depends on being in EU.

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Caroline Flint has decided to upset both Corbynistas and anti-Corbynistas on the Left with her decision today. I even saw some on Twitter calling for her deselection.

foxinsoxuk UK makes a good point about Momentum. They are very fired up and will likely be consistently campaigning throughout the country until whenever the next GE will be. In that sense, the expansion of the Labour membership is highly useful to Corbyn. Meanwhile it doesn't seem that the Conservatives are doing very much to increase their membership, or indeed broaden it.

Somehow struggle to see the fire lasting 4.5 years....

I don't. I don't think some Tories understand quite how enthusiastic many of these people are for Corbyn and quite how much they hate the Conservative Party.

Yep - the Tories seem determined to persuade people like me living in marginal constituencies that the absolute priority at the next general election has to be to use our votes to prevent a Tory government.

The slim prospect of attracting centre left Remainers like you to vote Tory if the Tories back soft Brexit as you are not keen on Corbyn is not worth the large numbers of Tory Leave voters who would switch to UKIP if the Tories kept the UK in the single market and left free movement uncontrolled

I'd never vote Tory. But I did not vote Labour in June.

Fortunately more people in Leamington did than voted Tory. Corbyn Gain

https://twitter.com/bethrigby/status/907226904289259520

OFCOM have ruled on Channel 4 wrongly identifying the Westminster Bridge attacker:

https://tinyurl.com/yb74dct3

I only skimmed it but this stood out:

Ofcom acknowledged the public interest in establishing the facts around this incident and, in particular, the identity of the suspected attacker, as quickly as possible. In this context, we considered there was a clear editorial justification for this programme to include as much information about this attack in the broadcast as rapidly as possible.

surbiton said:

Slackbladder said:

Seems Corbyn is just as muddled on the Single Market as anyone else is.

Oh dear.

I thought he was absolutely clear. He wants the UK to remain in the single market even after leaving the EU. In that case, the UK will not be the only country in that position.

There is no option of the UK unilaterally 'remaining' in the Single Market. There could be a potential option, in principle at least, of applying to join EFTA and amending the EEA treaties so that we become non-EU members of the EEA. That would of course mean formal treaty change, requiring the unanimous consent of the 27 EU countries plus the four EFTA countries. Quite how Corbyn thinks that might be achievable in the very limited time available is anyone's guess, but my guess would be that he hasn't got a clue.

The only other way of remaining in the Single Market would be to cancel Brexit, again involving the unanimous consent of the 27 EU countries. Good luck with that one.

Philip_Thompson said:

williamglenn said:

Allan said:

williamglenn said:

Allan said:

williamglenn said:

Allan said:

williamglenn said:

philiph said:

williamglenn said:

philiph said:

The result of the last 25 or so years in the single market has not helped a lot of our brethren, and I do believe they are entitled to a better life. The fact that the way they see of achieving it creates a new raft of issues isn't here or there. We will have to overcome them. That is our job. Quit the negativity and work towards solutions.

Is it 'the way they see of achieving it', or is it the way that a load of shyster ideologues have told them is the way to achieve it? My solution is to expose the shysters without remorse until they are run out of public life and then ask the people again.

That is only accepting the existence of one side of the balance sheet.

What is on the other side of the balance sheet? What are the benefits of leaving the EU that will improve these voters' lives?

Cheaper food once out of the CAP.

Give me an example of a good product that will be cheaper and explain why.

EU Tariffs = 33.5 per cent in dairy and 15 per cent on animal products. For individual products tariffs can be higher still. (Policy Exchange report 2017)

Do you think these tariffs apply to all imports from outside the EU? They don't.

You asked for examples of cheaper food once freed from EU tariffs. There is a big wide world out there if you are optimistic and look at life through a half full glass.

And you came back with a vague statement about tariffs instead of a concrete example of how leaving the EU will lower food prices.

Half the butter and over 60% of the cheese we consume is imported yet only 1% of those imports come from outside the EU. Why, when nations like New Zealand produce some of the worlds best and cheapest butter?

Because the EU imposes tariffs of €1,896 per tonne of butter.

There are many many countries with tariff and quota free access to the EU. If cheese imports are only 1% of the total, the reason must be something else.

EU tariffs on New Zealand butter are actually €700 per tonne, not the MFN tariff, and New Zealand is the top butter exporter in the world, which the EU as one of their main markets. The EU is about to negotiate an FTA with New Zealand, so will have lots of leverage to push through its asks in other areas.

NEW THREAD

Richard_Nabavi said:

TOPPING said:

Hmm. We are too big for EEA/EFTA as was well known way before the referendum. There is no reason why we couldn't do some kind of UK-bespoke deal which did, somehow, mean remaining in the single market and leaving the EU. Call it something imaginative.

Sure, in principle we could do some kind of bespoke deal, but that would require the unanimous consent of our EU friends, and is even less practical than the other two possibilities. There simply isn't time, even if the political will existed (which it doesn't).

Where there's a will...

Sean_F said:

surbiton said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/bethrigby/status/907226904289259520

To me that reads as Corbyn edging towards an exit from Brexit.

Yup.

In which case, he should not have voted for A. 50, and should have campaigned against Brexit at the last election. The die has now been cast.

Brexit has been given enough rope to hang itself.

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

surbiton said:

williamglenn said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/bethrigby/status/907226904289259520

To me that reads as Corbyn edging towards an exit from Brexit.

Yup.

In which case, he should not have voted for A. 50, and should have campaigned against Brexit at the last election. The die has now been cast.

Brexit has been given enough rope to hang itself.

Well, I know you've predicted a Peoples' Uprising against Brexit, but that really isn't very likely.

Richard_Nabavi said:

TOPPING said:

I appreciate you have consistently (perhaps more than anyone on here) been keen to put both sides' motives and activities. And equally, we would have hoped for a slightly different response from the EU27 (and that nomenclature itself gives away much of the game). But we had no right to expect it.

For Indyref, if Scotland had voted yes, then we, as a mature, developed, confident, coherent nation would have worked as well as we could have to ensure all was as smooth and mutually successful as possible. The EU is neither mature, nor developed, nor confident, not all that coherent. It is nervous and no doubt wracked by existential doubt. It is like a baby 600lb gorilla in many senses.

Now of course that is no reason for us not to have left it, but it does mean that our approach should reflect reality, rather than wishful thinking.

I agree with the thrust of what you are saying, but in all the criticism of the UK government's position, I can't really see anyone making any coherent suggestion as to what exactly they should be doing differently, with the one minor exception that sometimes ministers might have chosen their words more carefully. The UK has made it very clear that we want a trade deal, as frictionless a border as we can get, and a good solution for Ireland. It has also made it very clear that it is prepared to pay something to make this happen. If our EU friends don't want to tango, then there's no dance, but it won't be for want of trying on our part.

Unfortunately, it's like a mouse trying to lead an elephant in the dance, except the rodent thinks it is the bigger partner...