politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PaddyPower makes it 3/1 that TMay won’t survive beyond the end
Comments
-
How many centuries have Brits been saying that sort of thing about Ireland?DavidL said:
I think Captain Mainwaring would probably be enough to handle Eire.David_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
If Hitler and Napoleon and Philip II could not conquer us I doubt Leo Varadkar willRecidivist said:
Remember that once we leave the EU Ireland is a more powerful state than the UK. It will be more likely for them to invade and conquer us.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking.
If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
Who is our Churchill today? Who is our Wellington today?
On the 'Eire' thing...
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/9687709456315187200 -
No peace without Spain.
I didn't need promises or carrots. The 'Constitution' and the subsequent shenanigans leading up to Gordon Brown's squalid signing of the Lisbon treaty convinced me that our future lay outside Europe.
Walking in the bracing Siberian winds this afternoon has hardened my heart. I've joined SeanT's warmongers. I will have no truck with the various quislings, appeasers, guttersnipes and faint hearts cowering fearfully before Johnny Foreigner.
I shall put my faith in Mrs May and her plucky band of British patriots *mad laugh*.0 -
Well some of the security forces didn’t exactly cover themselves in glory.Sean_F said:
Quite independently of Brexit, there are a lot of Conservatives who have become very discontented with the outworking of the GFA, largely in relation to the hounding of members of the security forces.TheScreamingEagles said:See, I’m not alone in the Tory party, we should give away Northern Ireland, it is more hassle than it is worth.
At the very least, 81 percent of Leave voters felt the risk of the Irish peace process ‘unravelling’ was ‘worth it’ if this was the price of ‘taking back control’. Conservative Leave voters – supporters of what still purports to be a Unionist party – were even more vehement on this question: 87 percent felt it a risk worth taking.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/brexiteers-you-were-warned-about-ireland/0 -
In 1974 Britain voted for the worst Government in its history and had to put up with 5 years of utter turmoil. In 2016 we voted leave. The electorate will have to deal with the outcome of what they voted for. Thats how democracy works. As I said I voted remain but i am now so fed up with the EU I think we should leave with no deal. The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.FF43 said:
I agree with that. As far as I can tell John Major also agrees. But it doesn't help much beyond removing the possibility of ignoring the whole thing. For instance, are we all happy with signing up to the Withdrawal Agreement that the EU has drafted today? Are we OK with outcomes that could decimate our car industry? In each case those are leave options. They would be respecting democracy.. But is it what we want?currystar said:The country voted leave, thats it. Churchill won the war then lost the election. Democracy can be mad sometimes but it must be obeyed.
0 -
They did say how bad things would be - the public as it turned out either didn't believe them or thought it a price worth paying.MarqueeMark said:
20 months ago was the time to make that call. But you lost the argument and you lost the vote back then, Mr. Major. Blame the shit campaign your side ran.williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/psmith/status/968851464352346112RobD said:
Ah, so it's a second referendum he's after?williamglenn said:
While you're are at it, do you want to re-run the 1997 election? Convince us now of what a shit that Tony Blair is going to turn out to be?
0 -
Isn’t it Irish for Ireland?Theuniondivvie said:
How many centuries have Brits been saying that sort of thing about Ireland?DavidL said:
I think Captain Mainwaring would probably be enough to handle Eire.David_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
If Hitler and Napoleon and Philip II could not conquer us I doubt Leo Varadkar willRecidivist said:
Remember that once we leave the EU Ireland is a more powerful state than the UK. It will be more likely for them to invade and conquer us.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking.
If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
Who is our Churchill today? Who is our Wellington today?
On the 'Eire' thing...
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/9687709456315187200 -
Cough
John Major 29th May 2016
“There will not be another referendum on Europe. This is it.”
What changed his mind?0 -
Gaelic.RobD said:
Isn’t it Irish for Ireland?Theuniondivvie said:
How many centuries have Brits been saying that sort of thing about Ireland?DavidL said:
I think Captain Mainwaring would probably be enough to handle Eire.David_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
If Hitler and Napoleon and Philip II could not conquer us I doubt Leo Varadkar willRecidivist said:
Remember that once we leave the EU Ireland is a more powerful state than the UK. It will be more likely for them to invade and conquer us.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking.
If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
Who is our Churchill today? Who is our Wellington today?
On the 'Eire' thing...
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/968770945631518720
But it hasn’t been Eire since 1949.0 -
Unless you speak Gaelic?TheScreamingEagles said:
Gaelic.RobD said:
Isn’t it Irish for Ireland?Theuniondivvie said:
How many centuries have Brits been saying that sort of thing about Ireland?DavidL said:
I think Captain Mainwaring would probably be enough to handle Eire.David_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
If Hitler and Napoleon and Philip II could not conquer us I doubt Leo Varadkar willRecidivist said:
Remember that once we leave the EU Ireland is a more powerful state than the UK. It will be more likely for them to invade and conquer us.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking.
If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
Who is our Churchill today? Who is our Wellington today?
On the 'Eire' thing...
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/968770945631518720
But it hasn’t been Eire since 1949.
0 -
Nevertheless, I can see why people should get fed up with the idea that the victims of terrorism are expected to forgive and forget, while the much smaller number of victims of the security forces are not.TheScreamingEagles said:
Well some of the security forces didn’t exactly cover themselves in glory.Sean_F said:
Quite independently of Brexit, there are a lot of Conservatives who have become very discontented with the outworking of the GFA, largely in relation to the hounding of members of the security forces.TheScreamingEagles said:See, I’m not alone in the Tory party, we should give away Northern Ireland, it is more hassle than it is worth.
At the very least, 81 percent of Leave voters felt the risk of the Irish peace process ‘unravelling’ was ‘worth it’ if this was the price of ‘taking back control’. Conservative Leave voters – supporters of what still purports to be a Unionist party – were even more vehement on this question: 87 percent felt it a risk worth taking.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/brexiteers-you-were-warned-about-ireland/0 -
What a cretinous, hypocritical fool Major is. All his words are a dismal smokescreen for his belief that the people got it wrong, so their will should be overruled.
I suppose I might feel like that if I’d led my party to its worst result since 1832.0 -
There is no democratic mandate, far less requirement, for leaving without a deal. There are some pretty severe consequences in doing so that directly contradict the case made by the Leave campaign. Democracy mandates we leave the EU. That's it. It doesn't get you very far.currystar said:
In 1974 Britain voted for the worst Government in its history and had to put up with 5 years of utter turmoil. In 2016 we voted leave. The electorate will have to deal with the outcome of what they voted for. Thats how democracy works. As I said I voted remain but i am now so fed up with the EU I think we should leave with no deal.The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.FF43 said:
I agree with that. As far as I can tell John Major also agrees. But it doesn't help much beyond removing the possibility of ignoring the whole thing. For instance, are we all happy with signing up to the Withdrawal Agreement that the EU has drafted today? Are we OK with outcomes that could decimate our car industry? In each case those are leave options. They would be respecting democracy.. But is it what we want?currystar said:The country voted leave, thats it. Churchill won the war then lost the election. Democracy can be mad sometimes but it must be obeyed.
0 -
John Major agrees:FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
"And just at the moment when Theresa May is trying to inch her party forward, a warning, from prime minister to prime minister, not just that her approach is wrongheaded, but that her ultimate goal may be impossible to achieve."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-432299620 -
It depends whether a deal can be done.FF43 said:
There is no democratic mandate, far less requirement, for leaving without a deal. There are some pretty severe consequences in doing so that directly contradict the case made by the Leave campaign. Democracy mandates we leave the EU. That's it. It doesn't get you very far.currystar said:
In 1974 Britain voted for the worst Government in its history and had to put up with 5 years of utter turmoil. In 2016 we voted leave. The electorate will have to deal with the outcome of what they voted for. Thats how democracy works. As I said I voted remain but i am now so fed up with the EU I think we should leave with no deal.The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.FF43 said:
I agree with that. As far as I can tell John Major also agrees. But it doesn't help much beyond removing the possibility of ignoring the whole thing. For instance, are we all happy with signing up to the Withdrawal Agreement that the EU has drafted today? Are we OK with outcomes that could decimate our car industry? In each case those are leave options. They would be respecting democracy.. But is it what we want?currystar said:The country voted leave, thats it. Churchill won the war then lost the election. Democracy can be mad sometimes but it must be obeyed.
0 -
Alba is Gaelic for Scotland. If some tit jumped off the 9.30 from Kings Cross and started expostulating about breathing in the blessed air of Alba, he would swiftly be identified as a double tit.RobD said:
Isn’t it Irish for Ireland?Theuniondivvie said:
How many centuries have Brits been saying that sort of thing about Ireland?DavidL said:
I think Captain Mainwaring would probably be enough to handle Eire.David_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
If Hitler and Napoleon and Philip II could not conquer us I doubt Leo Varadkar willRecidivist said:
Remember that once we leave the EU Ireland is a more powerful state than the UK. It will be more likely for them to invade and conquer us.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking.
If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
Who is our Churchill today? Who is our Wellington today?
On the 'Eire' thing...
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/9687709456315187200 -
It is. But Empire II people don't speak Irish. Eire was the colonial era UK government term for Ireland, or if you want to distinguish it from the geographical island, Republic of Ireland. Those are the official terms that are used internationallyRobD said:
Isn’t it Irish for Ireland?Theuniondivvie said:
How many centuries have Brits been saying that sort of thing about Ireland?DavidL said:
I think Captain Mainwaring would probably be enough to handle Eire.David_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
If Hitler and Napoleon and Philip II could not conquer us I doubt Leo Varadkar willRecidivist said:
Remember that once we leave the EU Ireland is a more powerful state than the UK. It will be more likely for them to invade and conquer us.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking.
If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
Who is our Churchill today? Who is our Wellington today?
On the 'Eire' thing...
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/9687709456315187200 -
In what sense are they not respecting it? We are leaving.currystar said:The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.
0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
Doubt May will go in that time frame, though I did (in January) back her departure in Q1 or Q2 (10 and 9.8 respectively, since hedged).
Interesting that a referendum is seen as less likely than an election.0 -
Major didn't give a free vote on the EU at any point - but wants May to give one.RoyalBlue said:What a cretinous, hypocritical fool Major is. All his words are a dismal smokescreen for his belief that the people got it wrong, so their will should be overruled.
I suppose I might feel like that if I’d led my party to its worst result since 1832.
Jog on Johnny.0 -
Sam Coates has not apparently read as far as this from the EU draft Withdrawal Agreement:Scott_P said:
Article 14
Right of permanent residence
1. Union citizens, United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who have
resided legally in accordance with Union law for a continuous period of five years in the host
State, or for the duration specified in Article 17 of Directive 2004/38/EC, shall have the right of
permanent residence in the host State as set out in Articles 16, 17 and 18 of Directive
2004/38/EC. Periods of legal residence or work before and after the end of the transition period shall be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right
of permanent residence.
2. Continuity of residence for the purposes of acquisition of the right of permanent residence shall
be determined in accordance with Article 16(3) and Article 21 of Directive 2004/38/EC.
3. Once acquired, the right of permanent residence shall be lost only through absence from the
host State for a period exceeding five consecutive years.
Article 15
Accumulation of periods
Union citizens, United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who before the end
of the transition period resided legally in the host State under the conditions of Article 7 of Directive
2004/38/EC for a period of less than five years, shall have the right to acquire the right of permanent
residence set out in Article 14 of this Agreement once they have completed the necessary periods of
residence. Periods of legal residence or work before and after the end of the transition period shall
be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right of
permanent residence.
0 -
They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border.FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
Which treaty is this?0 -
I like to breath the blessed air of Écosse.Theuniondivvie said:
Alba is Gaelic for Scotland. If some tit jumped off the 9.30 from Kings Cross and started expostulating about breathing in the blessed air of Alba, he would swiftly be identified as a double tit.RobD said:
Isn’t it Irish for Ireland?Theuniondivvie said:
How many centuries have Brits been saying that sort of thing about Ireland?DavidL said:
I think Captain Mainwaring would probably be enough to handle Eire.David_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
If Hitler and Napoleon and Philip II could not conquer us I doubt Leo Varadkar willRecidivist said:
Remember that once we leave the EU Ireland is a more powerful state than the UK. It will be more likely for them to invade and conquer us.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking.
If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
Who is our Churchill today? Who is our Wellington today?
On the 'Eire' thing...
https://twitter.com/xtophercook/status/9687709456315187200 -
O/T, did we ever get an Ipsos More poll for February?0 -
lol, as ever the focus is entirely on criticising the UK’s position.sarissa said:
Sam Coates has not apparently read as far as this from the EU draft Withdrawal Agreement:Scott_P said:
Article 14
Right of permanent residence
1. Union citizens, United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who have
resided legally in accordance with Union law for a continuous period of five years in the host
State, or for the duration specified in Article 17 of Directive 2004/38/EC, shall have the right of
permanent residence in the host State as set out in Articles 16, 17 and 18 of Directive
2004/38/EC. Periods of legal residence or work before and after the end of the transition period shall be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right
of permanent residence.
2. Continuity of residence for the purposes of acquisition of the right of permanent residence shall
be determined in accordance with Article 16(3) and Article 21 of Directive 2004/38/EC.
3. Once acquired, the right of permanent residence shall be lost only through absence from the
host State for a period exceeding five consecutive years.
Article 15
Accumulation of periods
Union citizens, United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who before the end
of the transition period resided legally in the host State under the conditions of Article 7 of Directive
2004/38/EC for a period of less than five years, shall have the right to acquire the right of permanent
residence set out in Article 14 of this Agreement once they have completed the necessary periods of
residence. Periods of legal residence or work before and after the end of the transition period shall
be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right of
permanent residence.0 -
Should be out later on this week.Sean_F said:
O/T, did we ever get an Ipsos More poll for February?0 -
Indeed the EU seem to be showing rather more respect for the vote in terms of the amount of work they have done on it than the British government has.0
-
Maybe she's got more balls than you, Mr Major.....logical_song said:
John Major agrees:FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
"And just at the moment when Theresa May is trying to inch her party forward, a warning, from prime minister to prime minister, not just that her approach is wrongheaded, but that her ultimate goal may be impossible to achieve."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-432299620 -
2/1 for an election this year is a bit over the top IMO.0
-
Do we believe in self determination? If not Spain will act on their claim on Gibraltar and Argentina will act on their claim on the Falklands.TheScreamingEagles said:See, I’m not alone in the Tory party, we should give away Northern Ireland, it is more hassle than it is worth.
At the very least, 81 percent of Leave voters felt the risk of the Irish peace process ‘unravelling’ was ‘worth it’ if this was the price of ‘taking back control’. Conservative Leave voters – supporters of what still purports to be a Unionist party – were even more vehement on this question: 87 percent felt it a risk worth taking.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/brexiteers-you-were-warned-about-ireland/0 -
Mr. JS, yeah, that's not tempting me at all. I think a referendum in 2019 is a credible possibility, but I think I've already backed that at 6.5, so not tempted by 6 for one in 2018.
F1: looks like no running at all. Provided the inclement weather doesn't persist beyond this week, it won't affect things too much. If it does persist, teams may be going into Australia half-cocked.0 -
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
In other words, UK citizens can move to individual EU countries, but not between them.sarissa said:
Sam Coates has not apparently read as far as this from the EU draft Withdrawal Agreement:Scott_P said:
Article 14
Right of permanent residence
1. Union citizens, United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who have
resided legally in accordance with Union law for a continuous period of five years in the host
State, or for the duration specified in Article 17 of Directive 2004/38/EC, shall have the right of
permanent residence in the host State as set out in Articles 16, 17 and 18 of Directive
2004/38/EC. Periods of legal residence or work before and after the end of the transition period shall be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right
of permanent residence.
2. Continuity of residence for the purposes of acquisition of the right of permanent residence shall
be determined in accordance with Article 16(3) and Article 21 of Directive 2004/38/EC.
3. Once acquired, the right of permanent residence shall be lost only through absence from the
host State for a period exceeding five consecutive years.
Article 15
Accumulation of periods
Union citizens, United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who before the end
of the transition period resided legally in the host State under the conditions of Article 7 of Directive
2004/38/EC for a period of less than five years, shall have the right to acquire the right of permanent
residence set out in Article 14 of this Agreement once they have completed the necessary periods of
residence. Periods of legal residence or work before and after the end of the transition period shall
be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right of
permanent residence.
0 -
Perhaps the Northern Irish should have a second referendum on a United Ireland? They're all the rage.David_Evershed said:
Do we believe in self determination? If not Spain will act on their claim on Gibraltar and Argentina will act on their claim on the Falklands.TheScreamingEagles said:See, I’m not alone in the Tory party, we should give away Northern Ireland, it is more hassle than it is worth.
At the very least, 81 percent of Leave voters felt the risk of the Irish peace process ‘unravelling’ was ‘worth it’ if this was the price of ‘taking back control’. Conservative Leave voters – supporters of what still purports to be a Unionist party – were even more vehement on this question: 87 percent felt it a risk worth taking.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/brexiteers-you-were-warned-about-ireland/0 -
Wow, glad to see you to accept thatwilliamglenn said:
In what sense are they not respecting it? We are leaving.currystar said:The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.
0 -
They are making it as difficult as possible.williamglenn said:
In what sense are they not respecting it? We are leaving.currystar said:The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.
0 -
It's 24-1 on Betfair that May goes in Q1 2018 - somewhat better than Paddy Power's 3-1!0
-
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
Major is a joke. He screwed his own Premiership by taking us into the ERM when he was Chancellor and then got walked all over by the EU to the extent he ended up writing snotty letters to them moaning about how mean they were.MarqueeMark said:
Maybe she's got more balls than you, Mr Major.....logical_song said:
John Major agrees:FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
"And just at the moment when Theresa May is trying to inch her party forward, a warning, from prime minister to prime minister, not just that her approach is wrongheaded, but that her ultimate goal may be impossible to achieve."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43229962
Then he has the audacity to criticise how other people try to deal with the issues he helped to cause. He is a loser who should just shut up.0 -
Yup, pretty much the same...John_M said:
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
This age group were not people voting out of nostalgia for the Empire (which had vanished by 1975). They were voting on the basis of their experience of EU membership, which initially, they strongly supported.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.
0 -
I hope you are right. But I fear not. Corbyn will try and shackle the press. Max Mosley’s involvement won’t bother him, given the other unsavoury characters he’s cosied up to in the past.DavidL said:
The whole thing was made up of unpleasant views and self interest. Good riddance.TheScreamingEagles said:
Leveson 2 is probably dead in the water now.Slackbladder said:
Why would a XXXX XXXXX XXXXX want to fund a organisation wanting to control the press?philiph said:https://www.ft.com/content/eafd4ece-1c8a-11e8-956a-43db76e69936
Labour says will not accept further donations from Max Mosley
This raises a question as to whether Max Mosley is a fit and proper person to fund IMPRESS
I just can't fathom it #innocentface
Any supporters of it now will be tarred by the unpleasant views of Max Mosley.
0 -
I think a GE would be required to demonstrate a change of heart big enough for a further referendum. Poll shifts would not be enough.Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Doubt May will go in that time frame, though I did (in January) back her departure in Q1 or Q2 (10 and 9.8 respectively, since hedged).
Interesting that a referendum is seen as less likely than an election.
A further referendum may well be a condition of 3rd party support of a Labour minority government.0 -
I was an enthusiast for the EU in the eighties, when I took the view we all had to unite against the Warsaw Pact. While we do face common challenges today, they are not of the same magnitude.John_M said:
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
Compared with other demographics in 1975, they didn't.Sean_F said:
This age group were not people voting out of nostalgia for the Empire (which had vanished by 1975). They were voting on the basis of their experience of EU membership, which initially, they strongly supported.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
I do remember my parents' reaction to "if it isn't hurting, it isn't working" as interest rates reached 15%. It was not polite.Richard_Tyndall said:
Major is a joke. He screwed his own Premiership by taking us into the ERM when he was Chancellor and then got walked all over by the EU to the extent he ended up writing snotty letters to them moaning about how mean they were.MarqueeMark said:
Maybe she's got more balls than you, Mr Major.....logical_song said:
John Major agrees:FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
"And just at the moment when Theresa May is trying to inch her party forward, a warning, from prime minister to prime minister, not just that her approach is wrongheaded, but that her ultimate goal may be impossible to achieve."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43229962
Then he has the audacity to criticise how other people try to deal with the issues he helped to cause. He is a loser who should just shut up.0 -
So 12 LibDems can force through a second referendum? That's going to endear them to the masses......Foxy said:
I think a GE would be required to demonstrate a change of heart big enough for a further referendum. Poll shifts would not be enough.Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Doubt May will go in that time frame, though I did (in January) back her departure in Q1 or Q2 (10 and 9.8 respectively, since hedged).
Interesting that a referendum is seen as less likely than an election.
A further referendum may well be a condition of 3rd party support of a Labour minority government.0 -
So we no longer have a good enough reason to want a common legal framework that allows us to have frictionless trade?Sean_F said:
I was an enthusiast for the EU in the eighties, when I took the view we all had to unite against the Warsaw Pact. While we do face common challenges today, they are not of the same magnitude.John_M said:
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
You might like to know that the fake news you were peddling on here before the referendum has been corrected:Richard_Tyndall said:
Major is a joke. He screwed his own Premiership by taking us into the ERM when he was Chancellor and then got walked all over by the EU to the extent he ended up writing snotty letters to them moaning about how mean they were.MarqueeMark said:
Maybe she's got more balls than you, Mr Major.....logical_song said:
John Major agrees:FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
"And just at the moment when Theresa May is trying to inch her party forward, a warning, from prime minister to prime minister, not just that her approach is wrongheaded, but that her ultimate goal may be impossible to achieve."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43229962
Then he has the audacity to criticise how other people try to deal with the issues he helped to cause. He is a loser who should just shut up.
https://capx.co/how-the-eu-starves-africa-into-submission/0 -
A swing of 25%, over the course of their lifetime, is pretty substantial.williamglenn said:
Compared with other demographics in 1975, they didn't.Sean_F said:
This age group were not people voting out of nostalgia for the Empire (which had vanished by 1975). They were voting on the basis of their experience of EU membership, which initially, they strongly supported.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
You are making a different point, that doesn't undermine the one that Sean_F has made.williamglenn said:
Compared with other demographics in 1975, they didn't.Sean_F said:
This age group were not people voting out of nostalgia for the Empire (which had vanished by 1975). They were voting on the basis of their experience of EU membership, which initially, they strongly supported.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
3rd party could mean SNP.MarqueeMark said:
So 12 LibDems can force through a second referendum? That's going to endear them to the masses......Foxy said:
I think a GE would be required to demonstrate a change of heart big enough for a further referendum. Poll shifts would not be enough.Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Doubt May will go in that time frame, though I did (in January) back her departure in Q1 or Q2 (10 and 9.8 respectively, since hedged).
Interesting that a referendum is seen as less likely than an election.
A further referendum may well be a condition of 3rd party support of a Labour minority government.0 -
We're left with pursuing political and economic integration in order to achieve small gains in living standards. That has no bearing on freedom.williamglenn said:
So we no longer have a good enough reason to want a common legal framework that allows us to have frictionless trade?Sean_F said:
I was an enthusiast for the EU in the eighties, when I took the view we all had to unite against the Warsaw Pact. While we do face common challenges today, they are not of the same magnitude.John_M said:
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
I remember mine, which was not polite, either.Sean_F said:
I do remember my parents' reaction to "if it isn't hurting, it isn't working" as interest rates reached 15%. It was not polite.Richard_Tyndall said:
Major is a joke. He screwed his own Premiership by taking us into the ERM when he was Chancellor and then got walked all over by the EU to the extent he ended up writing snotty letters to them moaning about how mean they were.MarqueeMark said:
Maybe she's got more balls than you, Mr Major.....logical_song said:
John Major agrees:FF43 said:
...DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
"And just at the moment when Theresa May is trying to inch her party forward, a warning, from prime minister to prime minister, not just that her approach is wrongheaded, but that her ultimate goal may be impossible to achieve."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43229962
Then he has the audacity to criticise how other people try to deal with the issues he helped to cause. He is a loser who should just shut up.
It was also mixed with a sense of incredulity that former bank manager should be quite so daft (my surprise would be considerably less these days).
0 -
And in order to protect freedom. Complacency isn't a reason to regress.Sean_F said:
We're left with pursuing political and economic integration in order to achieve small gains in living standards. That has no bearing on freedom.williamglenn said:
So we no longer have a good enough reason to want a common legal framework that allows us to have frictionless trade?Sean_F said:
I was an enthusiast for the EU in the eighties, when I took the view we all had to unite against the Warsaw Pact. While we do face common challenges today, they are not of the same magnitude.John_M said:
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
The Peace Process was worthwhile, do you not remember the 'Troubles' and bombing campaigns? The problem of the border needs to be addressed, we don't need the attitude 'Let's Leave and ignore the border'.John_M said:
Perhaps the Northern Irish should have a second referendum on a United Ireland? They're all the rage.David_Evershed said:
Do we believe in self determination? If not Spain will act on their claim on Gibraltar and Argentina will act on their claim on the Falklands.TheScreamingEagles said:See, I’m not alone in the Tory party, we should give away Northern Ireland, it is more hassle than it is worth.
At the very least, 81 percent of Leave voters felt the risk of the Irish peace process ‘unravelling’ was ‘worth it’ if this was the price of ‘taking back control’. Conservative Leave voters – supporters of what still purports to be a Unionist party – were even more vehement on this question: 87 percent felt it a risk worth taking.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/brexiteers-you-were-warned-about-ireland/0 -
Labour would need a coalition of 5-6 parties - not including however many factions they have in their own party.logical_song said:
3rd party could mean SNP.MarqueeMark said:
So 12 LibDems can force through a second referendum? That's going to endear them to the masses......Foxy said:
I think a GE would be required to demonstrate a change of heart big enough for a further referendum. Poll shifts would not be enough.Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Doubt May will go in that time frame, though I did (in January) back her departure in Q1 or Q2 (10 and 9.8 respectively, since hedged).
Interesting that a referendum is seen as less likely than an election.
A further referendum may well be a condition of 3rd party support of a Labour minority government.0 -
We protect freedom by looking after ourselves not by giving the Austrians, Poles and others the right to change our laws.williamglenn said:
And in order to protect freedom. Complacency isn't a reason to regress.Sean_F said:
We're left with pursuing political and economic integration in order to achieve small gains in living standards. That has no bearing on freedom.williamglenn said:
So we no longer have a good enough reason to want a common legal framework that allows us to have frictionless trade?Sean_F said:
I was an enthusiast for the EU in the eighties, when I took the view we all had to unite against the Warsaw Pact. While we do face common challenges today, they are not of the same magnitude.John_M said:
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
Actually Ireland and the UK are committed by the British Irish Agreement (GFA), and are backed by the EU, to develop where possible institutions and procedures that apply to the whole of the island of Ireland. They have done this to a significant extent.RobD said:
They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border.FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
Which treaty is this?
(A correction to what I wrote).0 -
Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/9688777478451732480 -
Since the EU continues to try and play hardball on its own chosen ground, I think the time has come for the UK government to publish two things:currystar said:
In 1974 Britain voted for the worst Government in its history and had to put up with 5 years of utter turmoil. In 2016 we voted leave. The electorate will have to deal with the outcome of what they voted for. Thats how democracy works. As I said I voted remain but i am now so fed up with the EU I think we should leave with no deal.The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.
1. A first draft of a very limited treaty that would govern relations between the UK and EU in the event that we had to leave under WTO rules, setting out what limited variations on WTO and other concessions say on financial services the EU would be expected to make in return for selective concessions the UK were prepared to make, as well as clarifying what was non-negotiable. Essentially the basis of a minimalist agreement under what would still be in essence a hard Brexit "no deal" scenario.
2. A parallel impact study on the EU (country by country) of the impact of no deal. That would spell out for example the impact of the immediate loss of UK budget contributions and for example the impact of WTO tariffs on the volume of their future exports to the UK and the subsequent erosion of the massive trade surplus in goods with the UK.
That might concentrate minds in Brussels just a bit, but more importantly it would concentrate minds in governments in Berlin, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Dublin etc. As things stand, unless the EU changes tack the UK's first draft would be the only one worth discussing.0 -
Nobody seems that excited about temporary rules during transitions - you need to focus on the medium to long term.TheScreamingEagles said:Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually0 -
I was caught up in the 2nd Warrington bomb attack, and was very lucky not to be caught up in the Birmingham pub bombings. I've also spent a fair amount of time in the intelligence & security communities, so yes, the 'Troubles' does ring a vague bell.logical_song said:
The Peace Process was worthwhile, do you not remember the 'Troubles' and bombing campaigns? The problem of the border needs to be addressed, we don't need the attitude 'Let's Leave and ignore the border'.John_M said:
Perhaps the Northern Irish should have a second referendum on a United Ireland? They're all the rage.David_Evershed said:
Do we believe in self determination? If not Spain will act on their claim on Gibraltar and Argentina will act on their claim on the Falklands.TheScreamingEagles said:See, I’m not alone in the Tory party, we should give away Northern Ireland, it is more hassle than it is worth.
At the very least, 81 percent of Leave voters felt the risk of the Irish peace process ‘unravelling’ was ‘worth it’ if this was the price of ‘taking back control’. Conservative Leave voters – supporters of what still purports to be a Unionist party – were even more vehement on this question: 87 percent felt it a risk worth taking.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/brexiteers-you-were-warned-about-ireland/
My middle name is 'Lucky'. Sadly, my first is 'Un' etc.0 -
She's going to concede on a customs union, you might as well brace yourself now.TGOHF said:
Nobody seems that excited about temporary rules during transitions - you need to focus on the medium to long term.TheScreamingEagles said:Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually0 -
Good point. So, in accordance with their treaty obligations, the EU and Irish Republic won't be installing a hard border or insisting on any regulatory barriers to cross-border trade. If only you'd pointed this our earlier, we needn't have spent so much time worrying that they might.FF43 said:Actually Ireland and the UK are committed by the British Irish Agreement (GFA), and are backed by the EU, to develop where possible institutions and procedures that apply to the whole of the island of Ireland. They have done this to a significant extent.
(A correction to what I wrote).0 -
In 2016, 71% of 18-24 year olds backed Remain. If you are talking about being on the side of history ....Sean_F said:Peoples' attitudes towards sexual morality don't seem to change as they get older. OTOH, peoples' attitudes towards both the EU and immigration do seem to.
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.
0 -
I see John Major has become an enemy of the people.0
-
Not sure she will, actually.TheScreamingEagles said:
She's going to concede on a customs union, you might as well brace yourself now.TGOHF said:
Nobody seems that excited about temporary rules during transitions - you need to focus on the medium to long term.TheScreamingEagles said:Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually
I think she has the votes.
Major et al didn't make a speech when the rebels had the votes.0 -
Mr. Eagles, if she indicates that, she needs to be toppled.0
-
So 42% would back Remain in a referendum in 2057, if the previous trend was replicated?FF43 said:
In 2016, 71% of 18-24 year olds backed Remain. If you are talking about being on the side of history ....Sean_F said:Peoples' attitudes towards sexual morality don't seem to change as they get older. OTOH, peoples' attitudes towards both the EU and immigration do seem to.
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.
0 -
Whenever things look like they are turning to shit, I remember that the prosecco sellers would never allow things to get out of hand.
At least I think that’s what Boris promised.0 -
May was going to refuse to budge on that one. Now she's climbed down. There is a pattern here if you care to look for it.TGOHF said:
Nobody seems that excited about temporary rules during transitions - you need to focus on the medium to long term.TheScreamingEagles said:Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually
0 -
I don't think that precludes some customs activity?FF43 said:
Actually Ireland and the UK are committed by the British Irish Agreement (GFA), and are backed by the EU, to develop where possible institutions and procedures that apply to the whole of the island of Ireland. They have done this to a significant extent.RobD said:
They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border.FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
Which treaty is this?
(A correction to what I wrote).0 -
It's perhaps surprising how little trade there is across the Irish Border. Ireland exports eleven times as much to rUK as it does to Northern Ireland, and Northern Ireland sells about four times as much to rUK as to Ireland.FF43 said:
Actually Ireland and the UK are committed by the British Irish Agreement (GFA), and are backed by the EU, to develop where possible institutions and procedures that apply to the whole of the island of Ireland. They have done this to a significant extent.RobD said:
They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border.FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
Which treaty is this?
(A correction to what I wrote).0 -
Except it looks as though it's the same deal that's been offered by the EU.SouthamObserver said:
May was going to refuse to budge on that one. Now she's climbed down. There is a pattern here if you care to look for it.TGOHF said:
Nobody seems that excited about temporary rules during transitions - you need to focus on the medium to long term.TheScreamingEagles said:Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually0 -
Obviously the numbers of MPs may well be different post election, indeed that is the point!MarqueeMark said:
So 12 LibDems can force through a second referendum? That's going to endear them to the masses......Foxy said:
I think a GE would be required to demonstrate a change of heart big enough for a further referendum. Poll shifts would not be enough.Morris_Dancer said:Good afternoon, everyone.
Doubt May will go in that time frame, though I did (in January) back her departure in Q1 or Q2 (10 and 9.8 respectively, since hedged).
Interesting that a referendum is seen as less likely than an election.
A further referendum may well be a condition of 3rd party support of a Labour minority government.
A majority Labour government or Tory one wouldn't hold a further referendum, but there are a number of 3rd parties that may hold the balance, and insist on one.
Do I think it likely? No.
Do I think it conceivable? Yes.
Personally, like @AlastairMeeks, I do not at present want a further referendum, though I would be delighted to see the government thrown out by the people.0 -
Sure, but that's a different group of voters. The original point was whether political views evolved over the course of one's lifetime. In the case of the voters of 1975, they did.FF43 said:
In 2016, 71% of 18-24 year olds backed Remain. If you are talking about being on the side of history ....Sean_F said:Peoples' attitudes towards sexual morality don't seem to change as they get older. OTOH, peoples' attitudes towards both the EU and immigration do seem to.
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
There are plenty of impact assessment studies out there looking at what might happen in the EU27 countries under various Brexit scenarios. Individual governments have no doubt done their own ones - Ireland has, for sure. What they all show is that however bad the impact is for individual EU27 it is worse for the UK.Wulfrun_Phil said:
Since the EU continues to try and play hardball on its own chosen ground, I think the time has come for the UK government to publish two things:currystar said:
In 1974 Britain voted for the worst Government in its history and had to put up with 5 years of utter turmoil. In 2016 we voted leave. The electorate will have to deal with the outcome of what they voted for. Thats how democracy works. As I said I voted remain but i am now so fed up with the EU I think we should leave with no deal.The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.
1. A first draft of a very limited treaty that would govern relations between the UK and EU in the event that we had to leave under WTO rules, setting out what limited variations on WTO and other concessions say on financial services the EU would be expected to make in return for selective concessions the UK were prepared to make, as well as clarifying what was non-negotiable. Essentially the basis of a minimalist agreement under what would still be in essence a hard Brexit "no deal" scenario.
2. A parallel impact study on the EU (country by country) of the impact of no deal. That would spell out for example the impact of the immediate loss of UK budget contributions and for example the impact of WTO tariffs on the volume of their future exports to the UK and the subsequent erosion of the massive trade surplus in goods with the UK.
That might concentrate minds in Brussels just a bit, but more importantly it would concentrate minds in governments in Berlin, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Dublin etc. As things stand, unless the EU changes tack the UK's first draft would be the only one worth discussing.
Of course, the UK government could have produced its own draft withdrawal document today, last week or last month. It has not done so because it does not yet know what it wants. Given we are now 13 months from leaving you can't blame the EC for having a go at one itself.
0 -
"A lot of MPs seem to think "voting down the deal" means no or soft Brexit. But that ain't necessarily so: "TheScreamingEagles said:twitter.com/stephenkb/status/968882519360798720
Well, duh.
0 -
Can't argue with much of that, sadly.CarlottaVance said:
Major is a gent, and to my mind the archetype of how an ex-PM should conduct themselves; but past performance on the EU suggests it might be his blindspot....0 -
Well, duh. A lot of MPs either don't understand - or are pretending not to understand - how treaties work and indeed the difference between the legislature and the executive.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
I guess it doesn't. Border controls clearly cut across the spirit of the treaty, but whether spirit is a thing in a legal document is moot. OTOH, it more definitely does NOT preclude treating Northern Ireland differently from mainland Britain. In a sense that's the whole point of the BIA.RobD said:
I don't think that precludes some customs activity?FF43 said:
Actually Ireland and the UK are committed by the British Irish Agreement (GFA), and are backed by the EU, to develop where possible institutions and procedures that apply to the whole of the island of Ireland. They have done this to a significant extent.RobD said:
They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border.FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
Which treaty is this?
(A correction to what I wrote).0 -
+1Tissue_Price said:
Well, duh. A lot of MPs either don't understand - or are pretending not to understand - how treaties work and indeed the difference between the legislature and the executive.TheScreamingEagles said:
I've been relaxed that we're actually going to Leave since the Article 50 drinks party; some MPs seem to have a short memory....0 -
She will , May will call it a customs arrangement, to make you happy.Mortimer said:
Not sure she will, actually.TheScreamingEagles said:
She's going to concede on a customs union, you might as well brace yourself now.TGOHF said:
Nobody seems that excited about temporary rules during transitions - you need to focus on the medium to long term.TheScreamingEagles said:Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually
I think she has the votes.
Major et al didn't make a speech when the rebels had the votes.0 -
I have never used the mute button so much as recently hearing second rate journalist putting their particular spin on Brexit including Islam and Boulton who are impossibly pro EU. We deserve better journalists and politicians and someone who can provide a non biased sensible explanation of the way forward.
Major and others putting forward a second referendum have no idea of the complexity of holding one, the questions and who sets them, the time scale through the HOC and HOL and what happens if it is much the same0 -
The first part of that makes a lot of sense. Although if the UK had the legal or political brains to do that, surely they'd have presented their proposed withdrawal treaty to the EU, rather than the other way round?Wulfrun_Phil said:
Since the EU continues to try and play hardball on its own chosen ground, I think the time has come for the UK government to publish two things:currystar said:
In 1974 Britain voted for the worst Government in its history and had to put up with 5 years of utter turmoil. In 2016 we voted leave. The electorate will have to deal with the outcome of what they voted for. Thats how democracy works. As I said I voted remain but i am now so fed up with the EU I think we should leave with no deal.The EU clearly realise that Britain leaving could mean the end of the EU which is why they are not respecting the democratic decision of a member country.
1. A first draft of a very limited treaty that would govern relations between the UK and EU in the event that we had to leave under WTO rules, setting out what limited variations on WTO and other concessions say on financial services the EU would be expected to make in return for selective concessions the UK were prepared to make, as well as clarifying what was non-negotiable. Essentially the basis of a minimalist agreement under what would still be in essence a hard Brexit "no deal" scenario.
2. A parallel impact study on the EU (country by country) of the impact of no deal. That would spell out for example the impact of the immediate loss of UK budget contributions and for example the impact of WTO tariffs on the volume of their future exports to the UK and the subsequent erosion of the massive trade surplus in goods with the UK.
That might concentrate minds in Brussels just a bit, but more importantly it would concentrate minds in governments in Berlin, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Dublin etc. As things stand, unless the EU changes tack the UK's first draft would be the only one worth discussing.0 -
Not to mention more than a little hypocritical on this matter. He instituted a three line whip on Maastricht to have us enter the European Union, yet now insists it is a matter of such importance it should be a free vote to exit?Mortimer said:
Can't argue with much of that, sadly.CarlottaVance said:
Major is a gent, and to my mind the archetype of how an ex-PM should conduct themselves; but past performance on the EU suggests it might be his blindspot....0 -
No, far from it. It means they would happily give Arlene Foster absolute power in Northern Ireland given she has most seats in the NI Assembly and a majority of NI MPs and stuff Sinn Fein and the peace process.TheScreamingEagles said:See, I’m not alone in the Tory party, we should give away Northern Ireland, it is more hassle than it is worth.
At the very least, 81 percent of Leave voters felt the risk of the Irish peace process ‘unravelling’ was ‘worth it’ if this was the price of ‘taking back control’. Conservative Leave voters – supporters of what still purports to be a Unionist party – were even more vehement on this question: 87 percent felt it a risk worth taking.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/brexiteers-you-were-warned-about-ireland/
Nowhere does that poll give any evidence of Leave and Tory voters being anything other than staunch unionists, at least in the case of Ulster0 -
Answer the point at hand rather than dragging up old news when you are losing.williamglenn said:You might like to know that the fake news you were peddling on here before the referendum has been corrected:
https://capx.co/how-the-eu-starves-africa-into-submission/0 -
How much of that is phantom exports? I imagine Ireland has a fair amount of intellectual property being exported via transfer pricing.Sean_F said:
It's perhaps surprising how little trade there is across the Irish Border. Ireland exports eleven times as much to rUK as it does to Northern Ireland, and Northern Ireland sells about four times as much to rUK as to Ireland.FF43 said:
Actually Ireland and the UK are committed by the British Irish Agreement (GFA), and are backed by the EU, to develop where possible institutions and procedures that apply to the whole of the island of Ireland. They have done this to a significant extent.RobD said:
They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border.FF43 said:
I think the EU position on the Irish border, unlike ours, is crystal clear and logical. (a) They need to control what happens on their territory. (b) They are committed by treaty to not operating the Irish border. Logically his means their control needs to extend past that border. Of course that means controlling territory that is not theirs. The UK understandably objects to that. The UK position on the Irish border is that it commits it to be open, it will control it and in any case it doesn't matter whether it's open or not. The only way these contradictions will be resolved is if the UK commits to controlling Northern Ireland on a identical basis to the EU. So far it has refused to do so.DavidL said:Maybe we should just invade and conquer Eire. That would solve the EU's apparent difficulties and even with our much diminished forces probably wouldn't take more than a few days.
Or maybe we can finally agree that trying to resolve the status of the Irish border separately from our relationship with the EU generally is simply nuts and that the EU position is completely barking. If we have a FTA with the EU what problem exists on the EIre border that does not exist right now and which both sides are quite happy to ignore? The only thing I can think of is third party imports into Eire or the UK. Surely that is just paperwork? And once again exactly the same issue we need to resolve with the rest of the EU?
The ball is in our court. We can continue to reject common regulation with the EU for Northern Ireland and take our chance on either the EU folding or doing without a transition. I don't rate that chance particularly highly. The government thought they could get away with making casual commitments that they could quietly forget about. That won't work.
Which treaty is this?
(A correction to what I wrote).0 -
I'll never forget Sir John Major's intervention when Gordon Brown tried to disrupt the 2007 Tory conference by heading to Iraq.
He absolutely blasted Brown and accused him of using the military for political ends for the snap election he was planning on calling.0 -
If JRM can't manage graciousness & dignity, what's the point of him?
https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/9688835985805066240 -
We have never wanted a common legal framework.williamglenn said:
So we no longer have a good enough reason to want a common legal framework that allows us to have frictionless trade?Sean_F said:
I was an enthusiast for the EU in the eighties, when I took the view we all had to unite against the Warsaw Pact. While we do face common challenges today, they are not of the same magnitude.John_M said:
I doubt I'm alone in being very happy with the EEC, peaking in 1987 with the blessed Margaret parting the waves and creating the single market. I've been serially disillusioned since via Maastricht, Nice, Amsterdam and *Lisbon*.MarqueeMark said:
That's a great stat. Right there - the failure of the EU to deliver the EEC to those who were initially sold on the idea.Sean_F said:
In 1975, 61% of 18-29 year olds backed Remain. 41 years on, about 36% of the same voters, now aged 59-70, did so.0 -
Did "Sir" John Major give a free-vote over Maastricht?
I seem to remember it was a whipped vote and afterwards Tebbit went on telly and complained that the whips were literally pinning young MP's up against the wall by their throats to get them to vote with the government....
Now all of a sudden Major thinks there should be a free vote on Brexit?0 -
Tick Tock 7 months till October.
Much as Strong and Stable became Weak and Wobbly
Theresas Red Lines turning into White Flags faster than the granny tax was scrapped0 -
I'm confused. Is John Major an utter non-entity that no-one will listen to, or a Titan of Brexitology and Influential Figure who must be destroyed.
Lot of leavers claiming the former, but behaving as though the latter is true.0 -
Of course there will be some customs arrangement; we're not going to have hard borders with the EU. But it won't be the customs union, nor something that prevents control of our trade policy or future divergence.Yorkcity said:
She will , May will call it a customs arrangement, to make you happy.Mortimer said:
Not sure she will, actually.TheScreamingEagles said:
She's going to concede on a customs union, you might as well brace yourself now.TGOHF said:
Nobody seems that excited about temporary rules during transitions - you need to focus on the medium to long term.TheScreamingEagles said:Are we sure Mrs May isn't French?
She surrenders on every point, eventually
I think she has the votes.
Major et al didn't make a speech when the rebels had the votes.
In any case, it isn't the substantive matter, but the principle. Backbenchers shouldn't be tying the hands of the executive on treaty negotiations.0
