politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » At GE2017 six times as many CON voters said Brexit was the dec

Interestingly only 65% of Labour voters appear to have even given a reason (from the top 5).
While 88% of Tory voters have given a reason.

Does that mean a significant proportion of Labour voters are voting Labour regardless of reasons or policies?

Philip_Thompson said:

Interestingly only 65% of Labour voters appear to have even given a reason (from the top 5).
While 88% of Tory voters have given a reason.

Does that mean a significant proportion of Labour voters are voting Labour regardless of reasons or policies?

Looking at the detail in the data tables it's simply that Labour voters choose a wider variety of reasons beyond the top five. Don't know/no answer is 2% for Labour voters and 1% for Tory voters, but it's closer than that before rounding.

Ashcroft gave people 21 categories to choose from.

OblitusSumMe said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Interestingly only 65% of Labour voters appear to have even given a reason (from the top 5).
While 88% of Tory voters have given a reason.

Does that mean a significant proportion of Labour voters are voting Labour regardless of reasons or policies?

Looking at the detail in the data tables it's simply that Labour voters choose a wider variety of reasons beyond the top five. Don't know/no answer is 2% for Labour voters and 1% for Tory voters, but it's closer than that before rounding.

For 33% to be split between options scoring less than the 6% of Labour voters who care about the economy is quite remarkable.

Philip_Thompson said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Interestingly only 65% of Labour voters appear to have even given a reason (from the top 5).
While 88% of Tory voters have given a reason.

Does that mean a significant proportion of Labour voters are voting Labour regardless of reasons or policies?

Looking at the detail in the data tables it's simply that Labour voters choose a wider variety of reasons beyond the top five. Don't know/no answer is 2% for Labour voters and 1% for Tory voters, but it's closer than that before rounding.

For 33% to be split between options scoring less than the 6% of Labour voters who care about the economy is quite remarkable.

For example, about three times as many Labour voters answered "rising living costs" as Tory voters, so many of these issues are sub-issues of, say, the "economy" issue.

You could argue that Labour voters were thinking about the issues facing the country in more detail than Tory voters, but that would be a tenuous point made with only suggestive data, so I won't make it.

Just found this on The Times of Israel, perhaps worth thinking about?

https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-hails-jewish-state-law-as-a-pivotal-moment-in-zionist-history/?utm_source=The+Times+of+Israel+Daily+Edition&utm_campaign=abb9578673-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_07_19_12_31&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_adb46cec92-abb9578673-56026821

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Polruan said:

Philip_Thompson said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Interestingly only 65% of Labour voters appear to have even given a reason (from the top 5).
While 88% of Tory voters have given a reason.

Does that mean a significant proportion of Labour voters are voting Labour regardless of reasons or policies?

Looking at the detail in the data tables it's simply that Labour voters choose a wider variety of reasons beyond the top five. Don't know/no answer is 2% for Labour voters and 1% for Tory voters, but it's closer than that before rounding.

For 33% to be split between options scoring less than the 6% of Labour voters who care about the economy is quite remarkable.

Not really - for both parties the honest answer for a large % would be ‘tribal loyalty’ or ‘voting for people who seem more like me’ but people don’t say that so come up with other policy reasons as euphemisms. The difference is that the Tories have ‘Brexit’ as a euphemism for ‘trans-rational tribal loyalty’ whereas Labour has nothing similar except perhaps the NHS.

I guess the Tories’ strategy is probably about right at the moment if one accepts the findings that Brexit in and of itself is exactly twice as important as jobs, the economy and having a decent PM combined.

While that's true those answers were not an option on that question, which was: "Now thinking about the wider issues facing the country, which was the most important issue when it came to deciding how to vote in the general election?"

You want to look at Question 8.

On question 8 25% of Labour voters said that, "I trusted the motives of the party I voted for more than those of other parties," compared to 8% of Tory voters. Interestingly you have an almost identical split, in reverse, for the answer, "I thought the leader of the party I chose would make a better Prime Minister."

On other answers you can see that Labour voters choose Labour for their policies, while Tories chose Theresa May to negotiate Brexit.

MarqueeMark said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Before the next election at least. Brexit permitting.....

I wouldn't count on expecting any thanks for it. In 1997 the mood of the country was to throw out a divided government obsessed with Europe despite sound finances. Indeed, the fact that the finances were sound just highlighted the poor state of public services and the need for spending. Jezza is no Tony, but he doesnt need a 3 figure majority either.

Danny565 said:

anothernick said:

I am a little surprised by this finding. I canvassed extensively in south London in 2017 and quite often came across Tory voters switching to Labour because of Brexit. Maybe there were fewer of them in other parts of the country.

In my patch in northern England (in a seat where the Remain/Leave split was pretty much 50/50), Brexit very rarely came up, and when it did it was usually mentioned as a reason not to vote Labour ("Theresa has more balls and will take a tougher stand in the negotiations, Jeremy would just say yes to everything, etcetc.").

These findings and the thread header are consistent with my work too..

Clear correlation between Tory increase and the leave vote -

https://twitter.com/Pulpstar/status/1001460989244727296

Very weak correlation for the Labour/Brexit vote

https://twitter.com/Pulpstar/status/1001458627985670144

Beverley_C said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Perhaps it is an example of a competent Chancellor who the Brexiteers dislike intensely and sideline at every opportunity?

Hammond is undervalued by the betting markets, but seems to have quite a lot of support amongst the Cabinet and Parliamentary party. He is sane enough to deliver a soft Brexit too, the obstacle being that if he were to go to a members vote, the wider party would be likely to go for a frothy mouthed populist.

Philip_Thompson said:

Interestingly only 65% of Labour voters appear to have even given a reason (from the top 5).
While 88% of Tory voters have given a reason.

Does that mean a significant proportion of Labour voters are voting Labour regardless of reasons or policies?

The 2017 GE was odd in many ways, all sorts of factors at play not least
It was only two years in a majority Tory government, one year into new PM.
Corbyn and his factions policy’s and baggage are vote loser, yet the oxygen of publicity made him seem normal and articulate, and his politics more moderate than expected.
There was a 2016 reaction akin to the odd thing in Scotland where SNP lost indyref but then had overwhelming support at 2015. Encapsulating the wrong note perfectly was that Daily Mail front page, many decent, thoughtful and moderate voters in this country didn’t like being branded a saboteur and their politics crushed. It was the Mail wot lost it!
And that reaction was aided and abetted by the GE tone set by Downing Street, absolutely ruling GE out and then catching everybody on the hop with u turn, and a further u turn on manifesto after its launch.
May should build it into all her speeches “you turn if you want to, this lady’s hot for turning”
When they depose her they should give her a pair of flip flops as retirement gift.
She is every bit a bad PM as Gordon Brown, a greasy pole champion and nothing else to offer. By being inept at doing away with Brown, labour played into the hands of the opposition, And the Tories making that mistake with May. It’s reached that point now Labour should publically sound belligerent about this government and call for a GE, but privately do everything they can to keep May in there for as long as possible because Agent May continues to work wonders for Labours chances at next GE.

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Not a day too soon, then the gargantuan task of paying down the debt can begin in earnest.

anothernick said:

Foxy said:

Beverley_C said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Perhaps it is an example of a competent Chancellor who the Brexiteers dislike intensely and sideline at every opportunity?

Hammond is undervalued by the betting markets, but seems to have quite a lot of support amongst the Cabinet and Parliamentary party. He is sane enough to deliver a soft Brexit too, the obstacle being that if he were to go to a members vote, the wider party would be likely to go for a frothy mouthed populist.

i doubt Hammond (or anyone else) could deliver a soft Brexit. Both ERG ultras and ultra remainers now seem to think that taking us to the cliff edge is likely to result in victory for their side of the argument. The ERG want to jump and remainers think that the prospect of no deal will result in a u turn on the whole idea, which is why Mandelson and Adonis have come out strongly against the Chequers plan. And Labour will stick with its six tests, which no soft Brexit plan the Tories come up with will ever meet.

Soft Brexit is dead, it's either the cliff edge or some form of u turn, perhaps dressed up as a temporary postponement of withdrawal.

Or the EU governments have a word with Barnier

TOPPING said:

anothernick said:

I am a little surprised by this finding. I canvassed extensively in south London in 2017 and quite often came across Tory voters switching to Labour because of Brexit. Maybe there were fewer of them in other parts of the country.

I have said exactly the same about West London but was assured that London is a special case, which I agree it is to an extent.

There's also the point that Brexit might show up less as it was more of an underlying factor as to why younger more liberal voters ruled out even considering the Tories rather than a positive factor - which people will explain by reverting to what they like about Labour. This is especially true as Labour's Brexit stance didn't really enthuse many Remainers, who nonetheless voted for them as being more in line with their other values - e.g. pro-public services - than a Tory Party they viewed as not liking or wanting to understand them or their concerns.

Back in the glory days of New Labour the Tories put off a lot of voters by looking like a bunch of corrupt, hypocritical old men you'd avoid in a pub, who were obsessed with Europe and determined to criticise anyone having any fun (all the while shagging their secretary) - but I'd wager that if you ran a similar poll at the time you'd get a similar result - Labour voters saying they were voting that way because of the NHS, or schools. But an underlying factor was that a lot of people had just tuned out of anything the Tories had to say as culturally irrelevant and antagonistic to them. Brexit is arguably a similar motivatory factor - it's not the reason someone will give for voting Labour - but it's why they sure as hell aren't going to listen to anything the Tories have to say.

anothernick said:

Foxy said:

Beverley_C said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Perhaps it is an example of a competent Chancellor who the Brexiteers dislike intensely and sideline at every opportunity?

Hammond is undervalued by the betting markets, but seems to have quite a lot of support amongst the Cabinet and Parliamentary party. He is sane enough to deliver a soft Brexit too, the obstacle being that if he were to go to a members vote, the wider party would be likely to go for a frothy mouthed populist.

i doubt Hammond (or anyone else) could deliver a soft Brexit. Both ERG ultras and ultra remainers now seem to think that taking us to the cliff edge is likely to result in victory for their side of the argument. The ERG want to jump and remainers think that the prospect of no deal will result in a u turn on the whole idea, which is why Mandelson and Adonis have come out strongly against the Chequers plan. And Labour will stick with its six tests, which no soft Brexit plan the Tories come up with will ever meet.

Soft Brexit is dead, it's either the cliff edge or some form of u turn, perhaps dressed up as a temporary postponement of withdrawal.

I agree with that analysis.

Theuniondivvie said:

After the last 'not coming home' outbreak I hesitate to comment, but this is bollocks isn't it? Apart from anything else, how was the Crosses of St George per square mile measuring done?

https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1020171443513053184

Tosh, saw plenty - even in middle class areas.

currystar said:

anothernick said:

Foxy said:

Beverley_C said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Perhaps it is an example of a competent Chancellor who the Brexiteers dislike intensely and sideline at every opportunity?

Hammond is undervalued by the betting markets, but seems to have quite a lot of support amongst the Cabinet and Parliamentary party. He is sane enough to deliver a soft Brexit too, the obstacle being that if he were to go to a members vote, the wider party would be likely to go for a frothy mouthed populist.

i doubt Hammond (or anyone else) could deliver a soft Brexit. Both ERG ultras and ultra remainers now seem to think that taking us to the cliff edge is likely to result in victory for their side of the argument. The ERG want to jump and remainers think that the prospect of no deal will result in a u turn on the whole idea, which is why Mandelson and Adonis have come out strongly against the Chequers plan. And Labour will stick with its six tests, which no soft Brexit plan the Tories come up with will ever meet.

Soft Brexit is dead, it's either the cliff edge or some form of u turn, perhaps dressed up as a temporary postponement of withdrawal.

Or the EU governments have a word with Barnier

The EU may shift its position a bit but the chances of negotiating a deal that can command a majority in parliament in the very short time available are pretty much nil. The only deal that could be done in a few months would be an off the shelf copy of an existing arrangement EEA, Canada, Norway, perhaps Switzerland. None of these would stand a chance of getting through the Cabinet, let alone the Tory party or the Commons.

Danny565 said:

it was usually mentioned as a reason not to vote Labour ("Theresa has more balls and will take a tougher stand in the negotiations

Life comes at you fast.

currystar said:

anothernick said:

Foxy said:

Beverley_C said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Perhaps it is an example of a competent Chancellor who the Brexiteers dislike intensely and sideline at every opportunity?

Hammond is undervalued by the betting markets, but seems to have quite a lot of support amongst the Cabinet and Parliamentary party. He is sane enough to deliver a soft Brexit too, the obstacle being that if he were to go to a members vote, the wider party would be likely to go for a frothy mouthed populist.

i doubt Hammond (or anyone else) could deliver a soft Brexit. Both ERG ultras and ultra remainers now seem to think that taking us to the cliff edge is likely to result in victory for their side of the argument. The ERG want to jump and remainers think that the prospect of no deal will result in a u turn on the whole idea, which is why Mandelson and Adonis have come out strongly against the Chequers plan. And Labour will stick with its six tests, which no soft Brexit plan the Tories come up with will ever meet.

Soft Brexit is dead, it's either the cliff edge or some form of u turn, perhaps dressed up as a temporary postponement of withdrawal.

Or the EU governments have a word with Barnier

Barnier hasn't been boxed in by all sides, unlike May.

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Stark_Dawning said:

Beverley_C said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Perhaps it is an example of a competent Chancellor who the Brexiteers dislike intensely and sideline at every opportunity?

Quite right. It's ridiculous to think that lugubrious old Phil had anything to do with it during his short and uninspiring tenure. These things take years to engineer. George take a long and richly deserved bow.

No, it's not ridiculous at all. Rather it's a demonstration of the value of relative continuity and certainty in financial planning, which is to the credit of both of them.

Of course Brexit raises a few questions about what happens next...

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

anothernick said:

The EU may shift its position a bit but the chances of negotiating a deal that can command a majority in parliament in the very short time available are pretty much nil. The only deal that could be done in a few months would be an off the shelf copy of an existing arrangement EEA, Canada, Norway, perhaps Switzerland. None of these would stand a chance of getting through the Cabinet, let alone the Tory party or the Commons.

The problem seems more fundamental than that. May today appears to repudiate the guarantee on the Irish border that she gave in December. If the EU insist that it is necessary for the withdrawal agreement then we are down to two options: extend the Article 50 deadline or crash out with no transition period and no agreement on anything.

There will obviously be a strong inclination to kick the can down the road. There always is. On the other hand the EU may find it difficult to agree to extending talks if they feel that the British have gone back on something agreed in December.

I feel very pessimistic.

MarqueeMark said:

Pulpstar said:

currystar said:

anothernick said:

Foxy said:

Beverley_C said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Perhaps it is an example of a competent Chancellor who the Brexiteers dislike intensely and sideline at every opportunity?

Hammond is undervalued by the betting markets, but seems to have quite a lot of support amongst the Cabinet and Parliamentary party. He is sane enough to deliver a soft Brexit too, the obstacle being that if he were to go to a members vote, the wider party would be likely to go for a frothy mouthed populist.

i doubt Hammond (or anyone else) could deliver a soft Brexit. Both ERG ultras and ultra remainers now seem to think that taking us to the cliff edge is likely to result in victory for their side of the argument. The ERG want to jump and remainers think that the prospect of no deal will result in a u turn on the whole idea, which is why Mandelson and Adonis have come out strongly against the Chequers plan. And Labour will stick with its six tests, which no soft Brexit plan the Tories come up with will ever meet.

Soft Brexit is dead, it's either the cliff edge or some form of u turn, perhaps dressed up as a temporary postponement of withdrawal.

Or the EU governments have a word with Barnier

Barnier hasn't been boxed in by all sides, unlike May.

Wait until the prospect of forty billion not turnng up hits home.

Would be ironic if Osborne's Emergency Budget caused by Brexit was not in the UK, but in the EU.....

The forty billion will be paid come what may, UK Gov'ts always have a desperate desire to be seen to be playing nicely.
Remember Osborne and the last EU bill ?

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

Which I've never understood. A backstop which saw the whole UK aligned with the EU would surely be an excellent result for the EU.

Sean_F said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

Which I've never understood. A backstop which saw the whole UK aligned with the EU would surely be an excellent result for the EU.

Not if the backstop is a backdoor way of splitting the four freedoms.

OblitusSumMe said:

anothernick said:

The EU may shift its position a bit but the chances of negotiating a deal that can command a majority in parliament in the very short time available are pretty much nil. The only deal that could be done in a few months would be an off the shelf copy of an existing arrangement EEA, Canada, Norway, perhaps Switzerland. None of these would stand a chance of getting through the Cabinet, let alone the Tory party or the Commons.

The problem seems more fundamental than that. May today appears to repudiate the guarantee on the Irish border that she gave in December. If the EU insist that it is necessary for the withdrawal agreement then we are down to two options: extend the Article 50 deadline or crash out with no transition period and no agreement on anything.

There will obviously be a strong inclination to kick the can down the road. There always is. On the other hand the EU may find it difficult to agree to extending talks if they feel that the British have gone back on something agreed in December.

I feel very pessimistic.

Based on May's volte face on the backstop, there will be no withdrawal agreement.

Extension of Art.50 is a sensible solution. But that is not for the EC to decide. All 27 countries would need to agree. Now with Italy in the hands of right wing populists and neo-fascism ruling Eastern Europe, there will need to be kickbacks. So this may not happen in the time frame.

In the UK, the Headbangers will not agree to the extension because it could be permanent !!!!!!!

That leaves us two options:

1. WTO - against which there is a big majority in Parliament

2. A second vote - which Parliament with a narrower majority could agree with multiple ballots/votes.

TOPPING said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

Yes. So we shall see whether he will be pragmatic. I would be amazed if Tezza hadn't pre-negotiated this. I mean it's her white paper. Please tell me that she liaised with Brussels beforehand...

I thought it was Berlin?

Sun says 35 letters have gone in (in total, so far).

Sandpit said:

brendan16 said:

Sandpit said:

currystar said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FPT

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

Absolutely mega borrowing figures for the government, again. Implies 1.8% YoY growth from my back of the fag packet calculation.

I'd say quite good rather than mega.

But lets remember the OBR's March 2018 borrowing prediction for the year ending March 2018 was £45.2bn compared with actual borrowing of £39.4bn.

The OBR's borrowing predicting of £37.1bn for 2018/19 looks like it could be about £8bn too high as well.

At this rate looks rather like we could actually be on target to reach a budget surplus by 2020 afterall.

Is this another example of this totally incompetent government?

Not a day too soon, then the gargantuan task of paying down the debt can begin in earnest.

It's amazing no one ever really discusses this £53bn annual debt interest figure - 53 times what May gave to NI under the DUP deal every year for decades more. I don't see us ever paying down the debt given rising spending pressures and politics as now.

Indeed so. The government should be shouting from the rooftops that we spend half the annual NHS budget paying the interest on the government's mortgage for spending that’s already happened. The size of the government debt must also be playing on the mind of the MPC, and a significant factor in keeping interest rates on the floor - with the consequent distortions to the investment, pensions and housing markets that are causing so many other political and financial problems.

How much of this annual debt repayment is real and not just funny money transfers from one branch of government to another?

Sandpit said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

I thought he’d said that the backstop can only apply to NI and not to the UK as a whole, this from the March “Legal text of the December agreement”. Hence the comments about the EU trying to effectively annex NI and force a border in the Irish Sea. Barnier thinks that allowing the backstop to cover the whole of the UK would be “cherry-picking”.

The UK December statement said [ agreed with the DUP ] that in the event of any regulatory alignment between NI and Ireland, it will also apply to Great Britain as well. However, the defeat of the Customs Union amendment has scuppered that anyway.

However, a Trade Bill is coming from the Lords in October which could be amended to put the Customs Union back on [ if passed ].

Recidivist said:

David_Evershed said:

Given that the Lib Dems picked up few additonal votes at the 2017 General Election, it suggests that Remainers don't feel sufficiently strongly about Brexit to sway them to vote Lib Dem.

Whereas Leavers feel sufficiently strongly about Brexit to vote Conservative.

So whilst the country is split 52% Leave 48% Remain, the 52% really care about the issue whilst fewer of the Remainers feel strongly about Brexit.

In the event of another referendum or general election the strength of feeling amongst Leavers could be decisive.

And yet it is the remain side that can get huge numbers out to a demonstration.

Leavers won. They don't need to walk to change the result.....

surby said:

Sandpit said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

I thought he’d said that the backstop can only apply to NI and not to the UK as a whole, this from the March “Legal text of the December agreement”. Hence the comments about the EU trying to effectively annex NI and force a border in the Irish Sea. Barnier thinks that allowing the backstop to cover the whole of the UK would be “cherry-picking”.

The UK December statement said [ agreed with the DUP ] that in the event of any regulatory alignment between NI and Ireland, it will also apply to Great Britain as well. However, the defeat of the Customs Union amendment has scuppered that anyway.

However, a Trade Bill is coming from the Lords in October which could be amended to put the Customs Union back on [ if passed ].

Depends if a "common rulebook" is deemed to be a "customs union".

Some EU Ministerial comments as they prepare to consult with Barnier:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/20/france-minister-nathalie-loiseau-brexit-concessions-theresa-may-commons

Nigel_Foremain said:

Sean_F said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

Which I've never understood. A backstop which saw the whole UK aligned with the EU would surely be an excellent result for the EU.

And what would be an "excellent result" for UK plc.? can someone please tell me? A friend said to me shortly after the referendum result that nothing good will come from it, and that is looking like a pretty good prediction. It is all a pointless farce, unless you are a journalist or a politician, in which case it is a jolly jape, and who cares if lots of people lose their jobs? Price worth paying old bean they might say while privately sipping their vintage Krug.

You need to make up your mind whether Leave voters are (a) hedge fund managers twirling their moustaches and sipping G & T's as they laugh at job losses (b) unemployed inhabitants of Hartlepool (c) pensioners mourning the loss of Empire,

Or alternatively, people who are just as good and bad as you are.

grabcocque said:

Sean_F said:

But, there are also parts of the country where their support has never been greater, in the post-war period.

That's how it starts, but the toxin spreads.

The *overwhelmingly* negative reaction of Middle Tory England to May's tawdry compromise could be the beginning of rural and suburban England turning against the Tories.

Possibly. But, this government is not an especially unpopular one, particularly after 8 years in office.

NickPalmer said:

Some EU Ministerial comments as they prepare to consult with Barnier:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/20/france-minister-nathalie-loiseau-brexit-concessions-theresa-may-commons

If the common rulebook request is reframed as a trade agreement then that might cut the knot?

grabcocque said:

surby said:

rottenborough said:

Sun says 35 letters have gone in (in total, so far).

Why are the ERG frit ?

Because they done the math and know May would win a VONC.

which means she would be safe for a year. An excellent position for a leader to be in, given the circumstances. The saner elements of ERG know this.

ralphmalph said:

TOPPING said:

surby said:

Sandpit said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

I thought he’d said that the backstop can only apply to NI and not to the UK as a whole, this from the March “Legal text of the December agreement”. Hence the comments about the EU trying to effectively annex NI and force a border in the Irish Sea. Barnier thinks that allowing the backstop to cover the whole of the UK would be “cherry-picking”.

The UK December statement said [ agreed with the DUP ] that in the event of any regulatory alignment between NI and Ireland, it will also apply to Great Britain as well. However, the defeat of the Customs Union amendment has scuppered that anyway.

However, a Trade Bill is coming from the Lords in October which could be amended to put the Customs Union back on [ if passed ].

Depends if a "common rulebook" is deemed to be a "customs union".

I always took "regulatory alignment" to mean membership and I mean membership not access of the single market.

well if I want to sign an FTA with you it is presumably within my gift to say I agree with everything you say, do and will do on the matter?!

currystar said:

surby said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1020248143252815877

That is sad. But 80% of the Jewish voters vote Tory. What happened 30 years ago is another matter.

Remember in the final leadership ballot in 2010, 100% of the members voted for someone who was a Jew. Only 8 years ago.

I wouldn't mind if Mann, Hoey, Field were expelled anyway. And the other nutter.

We will end up with a very very nasty Labour Party

I don't think the Labour Party will be much different from what it is today. I don't know how many would resign, 5000 ?

A question: those who deem Labour to be anti-semitic, do they agree with the law changes in Israel which basically make it an apartheid state ?

grabcocque said:

TOPPING said:

NickPalmer said:

Some EU Ministerial comments as they prepare to consult with Barnier:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/20/france-minister-nathalie-loiseau-brexit-concessions-theresa-may-commons

If the common rulebook request is reframed as a trade agreement then that might cut the knot?

"Loiseau said that in the light of the white paper, France was unclear whether May’s government “gets it” on the EU’s refusal to haggle over the indivisibility of the four freedoms of the single market – people, capital, goods and services."

That does not to me sound like the EU is getting ready to fold over the four freedoms. That sounds to me like the EU is absolutely unmoved on this issues as it has been since day zero.

Yes maybe I'm getting England's chances in the World Cup-itis and my hopes will be cruelly dashed.

TOPPING said:

ralphmalph said:

TOPPING said:

surby said:

Sandpit said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.


This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

I thought he’d said that the backstop can only apply to NI and not to the UK as a whole, this from the March “Legal text of the December agreement”. Hence the comments about the EU trying to effectively annex NI and force a border in the Irish Sea. Barnier thinks that allowing the backstop to cover the whole of the UK would be “cherry-picking”.

The UK December statement said [ agreed with the DUP ] that in the event of any regulatory alignment between NI and Ireland, it will also apply to Great Britain as well. However, the defeat of the Customs Union amendment has scuppered that anyway.

However, a Trade Bill is coming from the Lords in October which could be amended to put the Customs Union back on [ if passed ].

Depends if a "common rulebook" is deemed to be a "customs union".

I always took "regulatory alignment" to mean membership and I mean membership not access of the single market.

well if I want to sign an FTA with you it is presumably within my gift to say I agree with everything you say, do and will do on the matter?!

Just following the rules or having a common rule book does not get you the main benefit of the single market. The main benefit is the trust between the national regulatory agencies that enable a manufacturer to take their product to one, get it certified so it can be sold in the EU with no challenge by another national agency and hence frictionless borders.
The difference between access and membership. Mays wants the whole shebang hence the EU constantly coming back with 4 freedoms non-divisable.

anothernick said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Sean_F said:

Pulpstar said:

TOPPING said:

I think we are reaching some sort of an endgame now (ha haha hahahahaha).

But anyway. It is clear that May is presenting the no Irish Sea border as her totemic fight against the EU.

https://theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/theresa-may-i-will-never-accept-eus-ideas-on-irish-brexit-border

https://thetimes.co.uk/article/i-wont-compromise-on-ulster-border-says-may-dsvdrzzhz

etc.

As I said late last night, her NI position seems quite coherent. And these headlines are setting up a "victory over Europe" situation.

The backstop document proposed that the whole of the UK would stay in the Customs Union and that there would be no border in the Irish Sea. Her Chequers paper reiterated that and so did Jolyon Maugham's "scoop" quote.

Juncker said that they would examine closely whether the backstop could apply to the whole of the UK and likewise he had been asked again by Chequers.

She is now "challenging" the EU to be flexible. The only way they will do this, IMO, is to accept her plan to allow a common rulebook for the whole of the UK, not just for NI.

This will then be spun as a victory for all concerned.

Does rely on the EU accepting Chequers, extending the alignment to the whole of the UK, that said.

Didn't Barnier rule this out ?

Which I've never understood. A backstop which saw the whole UK aligned with the EU would surely be an excellent result for the EU.

And what would be an "excellent result" for UK plc.? can someone please tell me? A friend said to me shortly after the referendum result that nothing good will come from it, and that is looking like a pretty good prediction. It is all a pointless farce, unless you are a journalist or a politician, in which case it is a jolly jape, and who cares if lots of people lose their jobs? Price worth paying old bean they might say while privately sipping their vintage Krug.

Your friend was right. Nothing good will come from the referendum. Nothing. It is the biggest act of national self-harm since the Spanish civil war. All of Europe will be diminished economically, socially and politically and the UK will suffer most of all.

"The Spanish Civil War"? A war in which a million people were killed, and a brutal dictatorship came to power?

Get real..

Not forgetting that cheese, milk and yoghurt will become 'occasional luxuries'. Why the IMF didn't include this in their report on the Eurozone this week escapes me.