politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Chancellor Hammond is right: extending the Article 50 deadline
Options
Comments
-
So as the government was assuring business that no deal was out of the question, spending billions upon billions on no deal preparations.MarqueeMark said:
If No Deal really is the shit show we are told, then early and detailed planning would have enabled that case to be made, with great authority. OK, some would still have pooh-poohed it as Establishment scaremongering. But a hell of a lot fewer than are doing so today, on the back of a fag packet, "It will be bad. Very bad" assessment.stodge said:
I was blaming him for the uncertainty not for the Referendum itself. As for "not being able to see the chaos" I have me and the Internet - Cameron had the entire Civil Service machinery to advise and guide him. Perhaps if you'd had a word it would have helped.Roger said:
How can someone who voted Leave blame David Cameron? All he did was your bidding. If you couldn't see the chaos your choices were making why should he?
The point is for whatever reason inadequate planning for the possibility of a LEAVE win was carried out and little thought, it seems, since then, on the possibilities of leaving without a Deal?
Thinking counter-intuitively can be very helpful - imagine the most unlikely thing that could happen, plan for it and work your way toward the more likely and probable options.
Almost every aspect of our interaction with the EEC-->EU has shown up our politicians and civil service to be a clown troupe.
Whatever on earth they would have been.0 -
Given the comments from Barnier about an extension needing a parliamentary consensus and reluctance to extend beyond the European elections, I wonder if they would now extend for a general election, particularly in view of your last paragraph.rkrkrk said:
I think extension and general election is more likely than 2. It's probably a better option for Theresa May.TOPPING said:Our options now are:
1. deal; or
2. extension and referendum.
Same as weeks if not months ago. And my money is on 1.
If the Tories win a majority, May doesn't need the DUP and can screw over Northern Ireland to get her deal through.
If Labour win, they'll negotiate a softer deal with a customs union. Then they'll probably need to offer a people's vote on that deal to get it passed through the Commons.
If it's a hung parliament then... er... Not sure. Probably deadlock continues.0 -
So you'll be lauding these same experts who advised Government "Don't prepare the case for No Deal. It will only scare the horses...."?Scott_P said:
It wasMarqueeMark said:If No Deal really is the shit show we are told, then early and detailed planning would have enabled that case to be made, with great authority.
"We have had enough of experts"
That a member of the Government had the audacity to say that on live TV remains astonishing, but explains a great deal of why we are so fucked right now
0 -
Nobody can say what parliament would choose as they'd have quite a few options, but the general range isn't particularly mysterious.MarqueeMark said:
What is the length of extension required to get a deal and agree the terms of a referendum to end the Brexit saga? Nobody can answer that.TOPPING said:Our options now are:
1. deal; or
2. extension and referendum.
Same as weeks if not months ago. And my money is on 1.
There's already a deal so if the idea was to have a referendum on that vs remain, the issue is how long it takes for Britain to organize a referendum: You probably want about 6 months from plan to execution. Minimum 3 months, maximum 1 year. If parliament legislated for it tomorrow you might be able to squeeze it in to still leave the EU before the next EU parliamentary term, but it won't.
If one of the referendum options is "no deal" it would be wise to have extra time after the referendum to prepare for it, but I doubt parliament will agree to a referendum on "no deal" and if they do I doubt the EU will extend for it. And if they're including "no deal", they're probably not being wise.
If the idea is to make a new deal, the negotiations will fill up all the time allotted to their completion.0 -
-
Oh, but your approach has panned out so well, huh? You can't run around saying "We are so fucked!" and then say "But my approach, that has led to us being so fucked, must have been the right one!"TOPPING said:
So as the government was assuring business that no deal was out of the question, spending billions upon billions on no deal preparations.MarqueeMark said:
If No Deal really is the shit show we are told, then early and detailed planning would have enabled that case to be made, with great authority. OK, some would still have pooh-poohed it as Establishment scaremongering. But a hell of a lot fewer than are doing so today, on the back of a fag packet, "It will be bad. Very bad" assessment.stodge said:
I was blaming him for the uncertainty not for the Referendum itself. As for "not being able to see the chaos" I have me and the Internet - Cameron had the entire Civil Service machinery to advise and guide him. Perhaps if you'd had a word it would have helped.Roger said:
How can someone who voted Leave blame David Cameron? All he did was your bidding. If you couldn't see the chaos your choices were making why should he?
The point is for whatever reason inadequate planning for the possibility of a LEAVE win was carried out and little thought, it seems, since then, on the possibilities of leaving without a Deal?
Thinking counter-intuitively can be very helpful - imagine the most unlikely thing that could happen, plan for it and work your way toward the more likely and probable options.
Almost every aspect of our interaction with the EEC-->EU has shown up our politicians and civil service to be a clown troupe.
Whatever on earth they would have been.0 -
Nothing's certain - but I think they would agree.Chris said:
Given the comments from Barnier about an extension needing a parliamentary consensus and reluctance to extend beyond the European elections, I wonder if they would now extend for a general election, particularly in view of your last paragraph.rkrkrk said:
I think extension and general election is more likely than 2. It's probably a better option for Theresa May.TOPPING said:Our options now are:
1. deal; or
2. extension and referendum.
Same as weeks if not months ago. And my money is on 1.
If the Tories win a majority, May doesn't need the DUP and can screw over Northern Ireland to get her deal through.
If Labour win, they'll negotiate a softer deal with a customs union. Then they'll probably need to offer a people's vote on that deal to get it passed through the Commons.
If it's a hung parliament then... er... Not sure. Probably deadlock continues.
We have no parliamentary consensus now, and this option offers a strong possibility that we could get one.
If they reject an extension for this, then why wouldn't they reject an extension for a second referendum? If we vote leave in a second vote, then it's still very unclear what we would actually do afterwards, and there would still be no consensus in parliament.0 -
I guess I'm not the first person to notice this but it's kind of amazing that these people's whole case for leaving the EU is based on being able to make lots of trade deals in addition to the current EU ones which will be wonderful for the economy, but you can just suddenly exit all the ones you're already in with a couple of months' notice and everything will be fine.Scott_P said:0 -
Your grandchildren will reap the rewards....edmundintokyo said:
I guess I'm not the first person to notice this but it's kind of amazing that these people's whole case for leaving the EU is based on being able to make lots of trade deals in addition to the current EU ones which will be wonderful for the economy, but you can just suddenly exit all the ones you're already in with a couple of months' notice and everything will be fine.Scott_P said:0 -
You can't claim your approach would have been better.MarqueeMark said:Oh, but your approach has panned out so well, huh? You can't run around saying "We are so fucked!" and then say "But my approach, that has led to us being so fucked, must have been the right one!"
If the Government had announced "no deal" the day after the vote, Airbus, JLR, Mini, Nissan, Toyota and Rolls Royce would now all be shut.
I don't believe you would have been cheering that from the rooftops0 -
You are indeed not the first person to notice that their entire argument for Brexit is unadulterated bollocks.edmundintokyo said:I guess I'm not the first person to notice this
0 -
That's not their case, whole or otherwise.edmundintokyo said:
I guess I'm not the first person to notice this but it's kind of amazing that these people's whole case for leaving the EU is based on being able to make lots of trade deals in addition to the current EU ones which will be wonderful for the economy, but you can just suddenly exit all the ones you're already in with a couple of months' notice and everything will be fine.Scott_P said:
Brexit is emotional, "let's take back control"; the trade deal stuff is just fluff0 -
Why does anyone listen to a word these people say anymore. They have no more idea about modern trade, supply chains, business, customs rules etc than a 5th century hermit.edmundintokyo said:
I guess I'm not the first person to notice this but it's kind of amazing that these people's whole case for leaving the EU is based on being able to make lots of trade deals in addition to the current EU ones which will be wonderful for the economy, but you can just suddenly exit all the ones you're already in with a couple of months' notice and everything will be fine.Scott_P said:0 -
It's not just A50. Parliament has also voted to repeal the European Communities Act 1972, and I don't see how you can bring it back without primary legislation.Chris said:
We can't be sure, but the Supreme Court's ruling was based on the principle that rights conferred by parliament can't be removed without parliament's agreement. For the same argument to apply to revocation, it would need to be argued that parliament's authorisation of the Article 50 notification - or some of the associated legislation - conferred a right which would be removed by revocation. I've never seen it suggested what that right would be.algarkirk said:
How sure can we be that the government can revoke Article 50 without parliament's approval? I for one am not as certain as you, given that parliament's approval was legally required to invoke it._Anazina_ said:
Nope. They could unilaterally revoke A50.algarkirk said:Nick Robinson's interview with the Chancellor this morning was extraordinary in that neither acknowledged in a long conversation that 'Taking no deal off the table' is not in the gift of the government. It is outside their power. 'No deal' is, on the contrary, the only outcome that is certainly within government's gift, poisoned chalice though it is. All other outcomes require the cooperation of either parliament, the EU or both.
That might not be palatable to you or them, but to say it is not within their gift is untrue.0 -
-
This is true, but unlike all the other options it is actually in play and there is a possible route to it, and while improbable is less improbable than all the other outcomes. All the outcomes are improbable, because there are too many of them. One of them is going to happen.AlastairMeeks said:The evidence that the deal has any momentum is skimpy, to say the least. We had the same nonsense over Christmas. It wasn't true then and it doesn't look as though it is true now either.
0 -
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:0 -
Very interesting. What I think has to be agreed is that there isn't a clear and simple route to government revoking without parliament agreeing. At the very least the mirror image of the Gina Miller litigation will be commenced, and I think a good number of lawyers will be queueing up to argue it. This takes time and 29th March is soon.Sean_F said:
It's not just A50. Parliament has also voted to repeal the European Communities Act 1972, and I don't see how you can bring it back without primary legislation.Chris said:
We can't be sure, but the Supreme Court's ruling was based on the principle that rights conferred by parliament can't be removed without parliament's agreement. For the same argument to apply to revocation, it would need to be argued that parliament's authorisation of the Article 50 notification - or some of the associated legislation - conferred a right which would be removed by revocation. I've never seen it suggested what that right would be.algarkirk said:
How sure can we be that the government can revoke Article 50 without parliament's approval? I for one am not as certain as you, given that parliament's approval was legally required to invoke it._Anazina_ said:
Nope. They could unilaterally revoke A50.algarkirk said:Nick Robinson's interview with the Chancellor this morning was extraordinary in that neither acknowledged in a long conversation that 'Taking no deal off the table' is not in the gift of the government. It is outside their power. 'No deal' is, on the contrary, the only outcome that is certainly within government's gift, poisoned chalice though it is. All other outcomes require the cooperation of either parliament, the EU or both.
That might not be palatable to you or them, but to say it is not within their gift is untrue.
0 -
The reason is that lots of people think that they're peddling snake oil, but their opponents are purely self-serving.rottenborough said:
Why does anyone listen to a word these people say anymore. They have no more idea about modern trade, supply chains, business, customs rules etc than a 5th century hermit.edmundintokyo said:
I guess I'm not the first person to notice this but it's kind of amazing that these people's whole case for leaving the EU is based on being able to make lots of trade deals in addition to the current EU ones which will be wonderful for the economy, but you can just suddenly exit all the ones you're already in with a couple of months' notice and everything will be fine.Scott_P said:0 -
-
From the moment you and your fellow travelers voted Leave we were fucked.MarqueeMark said:
Oh, but your approach has panned out so well, huh? You can't run around saying "We are so fucked!" and then say "But my approach, that has led to us being so fucked, must have been the right one!"TOPPING said:
So as the government was assuring business that no deal was out of the question, spending billions upon billions on no deal preparations.MarqueeMark said:
If No Deal really is the shit show we are told, then early and detailed planning would have enabled that case to be made, with great authority. OK, some would still have pooh-poohed it as Establishment scaremongering. But a hell of a lot fewer than are doing so today, on the back of a fag packet, "It will be bad. Very bad" assessment.stodge said:
I was blaming him for the uncertainty not for the Referendum itself. As for "not being able to see the chaos" I have me and the Internet - Cameron had the entire Civil Service machinery to advise and guide him. Perhaps if you'd had a word it would have helped.Roger said:
How can someone who voted Leave blame David Cameron? All he did was your bidding. If you couldn't see the chaos your choices were making why should he?
The point is for whatever reason inadequate planning for the possibility of a LEAVE win was carried out and little thought, it seems, since then, on the possibilities of leaving without a Deal?
Thinking counter-intuitively can be very helpful - imagine the most unlikely thing that could happen, plan for it and work your way toward the more likely and probable options.
Almost every aspect of our interaction with the EEC-->EU has shown up our politicians and civil service to be a clown troupe.
Whatever on earth they would have been.
Although I know you will feel much better once the oppressive foot of EU domination is lifted from your neck.0 -
Um, excuse me, but doing down France & Scotland are famously English traditional pastimes. To expect otherwise is delusional. Remember we only went into the EEC to screw up the french hegemony..._Anazina_ said:
Agreed. The Francophobia and Hibernophobia on here are sickening at times.
0 -
https://youtu.be/wTxUPXOMhq8rkrkrk said:
Nothing's certain - but I think they would agree.Chris said:
Given the comments from Barnier about an extension needing a parliamentary consensus and reluctance to extend beyond the European elections, I wonder if they would now extend for a general election, particularly in view of your last paragraph.rkrkrk said:
I think extension and general election is more likely than 2. It's probably a better option for Theresa May.TOPPING said:Our options now are:
1. deal; or
2. extension and referendum.
Same as weeks if not months ago. And my money is on 1.
If the Tories win a majority, May doesn't need the DUP and can screw over Northern Ireland to get her deal through.
If Labour win, they'll negotiate a softer deal with a customs union. Then they'll probably need to offer a people's vote on that deal to get it passed through the Commons.
If it's a hung parliament then... er... Not sure. Probably deadlock continues.
We have no parliamentary consensus now, and this option offers a strong possibility that we could get one.
If they reject an extension for this, then why wouldn't they reject an extension for a second referendum? If we vote leave in a second vote, then it's still very unclear what we would actually do afterwards, and there would still be no consensus in parliament.
0 -
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:
0 -
Perhaps he appeals to a lot of people's inner snob? He certainly is not blinding them with intellectual brilliance.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:twitter.com/bopinion/status/1088737544794226688
0 -
-
The nouveau riche are no better when it comes to nepotism.SouthamObserver said:
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:0 -
The most likely outcome is No Deal, because that is the trajectory we are on. For that to change something has to change. And that does not look likely. What seems to be happening now is that a lot of Tories are, in effect, going to positively vote for No Deal, this taking full ownership of its consequences. The Labour leadership can see this and will do absolutely nothing to stop it from happening. It is a gift that in their wildest dreams they could not have imagined possible.algarkirk said:
This is true, but unlike all the other options it is actually in play and there is a possible route to it, and while improbable is less improbable than all the other outcomes. All the outcomes are improbable, because there are too many of them. One of them is going to happen.AlastairMeeks said:The evidence that the deal has any momentum is skimpy, to say the least. We had the same nonsense over Christmas. It wasn't true then and it doesn't look as though it is true now either.
0 -
France has its enarques, and the US their Alumni. Elites are good at perpetuating themselves.tlg86 said:
The nouveau riche are no better when it comes to nepotism.SouthamObserver said:
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:0 -
Philip Hammond gave a mature and reasoned argument on Brexit to Sky this morning appealing to support the deal, and is against extending A50
Hammond and TM are grown up pragmatic politicians steering a course between economic disaster and respecting the referendum0 -
I thought Hibernia was Ireland?megalomaniacs4u said:
Um, excuse me, but doing down France & Scotland are famously English traditional pastimes. To expect otherwise is delusional. Remember we only went into the EEC to screw up the french hegemony..._Anazina_ said:
Agreed. The Francophobia and Hibernophobia on here are sickening at times.0 -
I would not be too sure of that. The "Plucky Britain stands alone" brigade seem to forget that it took 30 or 40 years to economically recover from the last time.Scott_P said:
You can't claim your approach would have been better.MarqueeMark said:Oh, but your approach has panned out so well, huh? You can't run around saying "We are so fucked!" and then say "But my approach, that has led to us being so fucked, must have been the right one!"
If the Government had announced "no deal" the day after the vote, Airbus, JLR, Mini, Nissan, Toyota and Rolls Royce would now all be shut.
I don't believe you would have been cheering that from the rooftops
I wonder how long it will be before we go cap in hand to the IMF this time?0 -
Kind of my thinking.algarkirk said:
This is true, but unlike all the other options it is actually in play and there is a possible route to it, and while improbable is less improbable than all the other outcomes. All the outcomes are improbable, because there are too many of them. One of them is going to happen
No majority in parliament for any of:
(i) the deal
(ii) delay for a harder deal
(iii) delay for a softer deal
(iv) no deal
(v) delay for a 2nd referendum
(vi) revocation
But unless we are going to have a general election we must do something. Given this, the deal stands out. It respects the 2016 vote. It is there and available. It buys time to nail down the future relationship in a stable climate. It is the product of 2 years of negotiation between the parties.
It has put in the hard graft and can definitely do the job. The other candidates are a mix of bullshitters, charlatans, dreamers, vandals and procrastinators.
Deal, you are far from perfect, but it's to your great credit that you do not pretend to be.
Deal, congratulations, you're hired.0 -
Great piece by OGH and its correct - No Deal is a burning beacon of hope burnished by people that John Major may have described as "the dispossessed and the never possessed". I get it - things are harder than they should be and people want better. Sure, but here's the problem - it will be a lot worse, not a lot better.
That people don't know that isn't the problem. It's that all of the facts are there to see, all the evidence has been presented, and they are chosing to ignore it. If we do crash out - and I'm now of the view that we will albeit briefly - they won't be celebrating and exercising their bulldog spirit, they will be saying "why's there no fucking food in Tesco"
No political solution is achievable so I expect we will crash out, experience the crushing economic crash briefly, then climb back in to a compromise deal. I've put major customers on "stop" where due to the lack of acceptance of new prices we cease supply of product. It never stays on stop for more than a few days, the lack of products on shelf becomes a far bigger problem than the few percentages points of profit margin being argued over. Will be the same for crash Brexit.0 -
I don't think it's about that particularly - we always look back to a halcyon age, despite the fact that things were generally a lot worse a generation ago. Town centres, parks, trains, buses were filthier and more dangerous when I was a kid two decades ago. As someone who came of age around the time of the 2008 crash we do kind of feel we had a prosperous future stolen from us, but that's by-the-by in relation to Brexit - otherwise boomers would be voting remain and youngsters would be voting out. The reverse is true.stodge said:It's a fascinating article by Kibasi and it's hard not to agree with large parts of it. I'm forced to ask how we got to this place or these places.
My mother always said it was when they got rid of the park keepers - she always said that was then civil behaviour began to deteriorate. I thought she was foolish but perhaps she had a point. I've worked for too many organisations (including my current one) where they understand the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
Somewhere, and I'm going to try not to apportion blame to individuals or even to political parties, we lost our appreciation of the value of society, community, each other and possibly ourselves.
It all became about self-enhancement via material acquisition, the measurement of a good life by the things you had and for those who didn't or couldn't have "the nice things" in life inevitably appeared darker, bleaker, less hopeful, less worth living.
If you have a park, it always looks better when it's looked after but we would rather have our own money and buy the things we want than pay to have someone look after our park.
I think Mum was right after all.
What's changed I think is the internet and social media. Pretty much every area of culture used to be policed by gatekeepers who were 'experts'. They've been utterly destroyed or rendered impotent. Tabloid editors, TV, and record execs nor ministers and shadow ministers can't make taste anymore - as anyone with a degree of social media savvy (or is backed by people who do) and a message that is well targeted can build themselves up as a star.
In some ways that's a good thing. Governments can't call in newspaper editors to ask them to drop an issue. Simon Cowell can't use his promotional clout to get Mr. Blobby to number one. But we're currently in the wild west stage where the gatekeepers haven't been replaced by a new set of rules, and peoples' faith in politics is so low, they'll believe any chancer who tells them their problems are easily solved - so you get the likes of Rees-Mogg, Corbyn, Farage, Johnson etc. who'll all promise 12 impossible things before breakfast, but whose message gets out to enough true believers wanting to shut out any contradictions, to make them real players.0 -
It is. Begorrah!!!Penddu said:
I thought Hibernia was Ireland?megalomaniacs4u said:
Um, excuse me, but doing down France & Scotland are famously English traditional pastimes. To expect otherwise is delusional. Remember we only went into the EEC to screw up the french hegemony..._Anazina_ said:
Agreed. The Francophobia and Hibernophobia on here are sickening at times.
0 -
Agree. Except that a GE should not count as doing something, there isn't time and there is no reason to think the result would resolve the central dilemma or propose a new agreed way forward.kinabalu said:
Kind of my thinking.algarkirk said:
This is true, but unlike all the other options it is actually in play and there is a possible route to it, and while improbable is less improbable than all the other outcomes. All the outcomes are improbable, because there are too many of them. One of them is going to happen
No majority in parliament for any of:
(i) the deal
(ii) delay for a harder deal
(iii) delay for a softer deal
(iv) no deal
(v) delay for a 2nd referendum
(vi) revocation
But unless we are going to have a general election we must do something. Given this, the deal stands out. It respects the 2016 vote. It is there and available. It buys time to nail down the future relationship in a stable climate. It is the product of 2 years of negotiation between the parties.
It has put in the hard graft and can definitely do the job. The other candidates are a mix of bullshitters, charlatans, dreamers, vandals and procrastinators.
Deal, you are far from perfect, but it's to your great credit that you do not pretend to be.
Deal, congratulations, you're hired.
In a constituency with four about equally favoured candidates (happens in Scotland sometimes) the one with 25% plus a bit wins. TMs deal is like that, until in March it becomes only a two horse race between no deal and TM deal. From that there can only be one winner.
0 -
Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=210 -
Actually worse. At least the "old" wealthy have a degree of realising they are there by realisation of their background and so have some feeling of obligations. The nouveau riche just think they deserve it because of their own efforts and that, if their children turn out to be successful (I'm thinking here of the likes of Stella McCartney et al), it is all because they have they have inherited that brilliance as opposed to the fact their parents opened the door for them to get into industries and positions that are closed to otherstlg86 said:
The nouveau riche are no better when it comes to nepotism.SouthamObserver said:
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:0 -
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=210 -
They generally send their kids private, too.tlg86 said:
The nouveau riche are no better when it comes to nepotism.SouthamObserver said:
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:
0 -
-
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/10887545819186298890 -
"Could" doing the heavy lifting again.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=210 -
Until the point comes in March when the Conservatives are lined up behind TMs deal. That deal or no deal are the only options. Labour would actually need real courage to be the major body of votes which precipitated no deal because it would put at risk not only their remain supporters - as Labour will have stopped a deal which is at least civilized and led us to crash out - but their leave supporters too as Labour can then be targeted as the cause of the problems of 'no deal'. I think that is too much of a political risk for Labour to take.SouthamObserver said:
The most likely outcome is No Deal, because that is the trajectory we are on. For that to change something has to change. And that does not look likely. What seems to be happening now is that a lot of Tories are, in effect, going to positively vote for No Deal, this taking full ownership of its consequences. The Labour leadership can see this and will do absolutely nothing to stop it from happening. It is a gift that in their wildest dreams they could not have imagined possible.algarkirk said:
This is true, but unlike all the other options it is actually in play and there is a possible route to it, and while improbable is less improbable than all the other outcomes. All the outcomes are improbable, because there are too many of them. One of them is going to happen.AlastairMeeks said:The evidence that the deal has any momentum is skimpy, to say the least. We had the same nonsense over Christmas. It wasn't true then and it doesn't look as though it is true now either.
0 -
All of this 'we could and should have planned extensively for no deal' is sloppy talk.Scott_P said:If the Government had announced "no deal" the day after the vote, Airbus, JLR, Mini, Nissan, Toyota and Rolls Royce would now all be shut
To have truly planned for it, in the meaningful sense of taking all of the actions required to mitigate its impact materially, would have been an enormous undertaking absorbing a great deal of time and money. Not only that, if it were clear that it was a serious prospect, many of the negative consequences of it occurring would have been triggered in anticipation.
Another unicorn, this time of the retrospective variety. Never a runner.0 -
When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc
0 -
Hammond's position is just about tenable, since he supports May's WA. But people like Caroline Flint (on last night's This Week) who are against the WA and against the A50 extension - what planet are they on? What power or ability does she have to change the WA to her satisfaction WITHIN NINE WEEKS??0
-
-
BECAUSE there's only nine weeks - if you hold the line on No Deal being the alternative outcome.Dadge said:Hammond's position is just about tenable, since he supports May's WA. But people like Caroline Flint (on last night's This Week) who are against the WA and against the A50 extension - what planet are they on? What power or ability does she have to change the WA to her satisfaction WITHIN NINE WEEKS??
0 -
When the banks were bailed out.rottenborough said:
When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc0 -
It is truly amazing. Who would have thought that we could be so pig-headedly stupid?rottenborough said:
When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc
When I listen to those who say they voted for this because they "... have nothing to lose", I think "You might be in for a surprise!"
It is why I have come to the sad conclusion that we need to No Deal Brexit. Perhaps the short term pain will be worth the long term gain when a large slice of the electorate find out that you simply cannot turn your back on the world.0 -
Massive civil unrest is the worst that could happen. The best would be a complete disintegration of faith in the democratic system and a huge rise in support for extremist parties.stodge said:
Oh, I don't know. What's the worst that could happen if May stood up and said the Government was voluntarily revoking A50 and choosing to remain in the EU on current terms?Richard_Tyndall said:
So your answer to No Deal is to automatically Remain.
And you wonder why no one takes these suggestions seriously.
The Conservative Party would fragment, its poll share would collapse and we might see by the time of the local elections two sets of Conservative candidates on every ballot paper - very little downside there as far as I can see and think of how many extra members and supporters UKIP would get? How we'd all chortle.
Both are far more disturbing options than a No Deal. Which would be more likely would depend on how many people chose my route of simply not taking part any more and how many actively went out to change things outside the political system.
0 -
Me. Still very happy with the decision.Stark_Dawning said:Be honest now. Who doesn't think Brexit has turned out to be utterly ghastly?
0 -
The great financial crash of 2008 is often advanced as the reason why experts are now so mistrusted.rottenborough said:When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc
It must be a large part of it, I would have thought.
Many emperors (many of them living like emperors) were shown to have no clothes back then.0 -
Crashing out with no deal is extremely likely to lead to massive civil unrest and a huge rise in support for extremist parties.Richard_Tyndall said:Massive civil unrest is the worst that could happen. The best would be a complete disintegration of faith in the democratic system and a huge rise in support for extremist parties.
Both are far more disturbing options than a No Deal. Which would be more likely would depend on how many people chose my route of simply not taking part any more and how many actively went out to change things outside the political system.0 -
The problem arose because politicians put SPIN on the experts advice until it was embellished so much as to be worthless.rottenborough said:
When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc
Think Climate change, the politicians wanted sound bites so the polar bears will die, the Himalayan Glaciers will melt, etc. Then we have the classic of only 25K eastern europeans will come to the UK experts say.
The expert advice should just be published and subject to peer review and we would be in a much better place.0 -
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
The EU have brought this on themselves with their obsession with political union and the economics on all sides are serious collateral.0 -
Roger Stone arrested.
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/426919-roger-stone-arrested-by-fbi-cnn0 -
I am sure you didn't mean that to sound quite the way it didIanB2 said:
The legacy of the first female PMstodge said:It's a fascinating article by Kibasi and it's hard not to agree with large parts of it. I'm forced to ask how we got to this place or these places.
My mother always said it was when they got rid of the park keepers - she always said that was then civil behaviour began to deteriorate. I thought she was foolish but perhaps she had a point. I've worked for too many organisations (including my current one) where they understand the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
Somewhere, and I'm going to try not to apportion blame to individuals or even to political parties, we lost our appreciation of the value of society, community, each other and possibly ourselves.
It all became about self-enhancement via material acquisition, the measurement of a good life by the things you had and for those who didn't or couldn't have "the nice things" in life inevitably appeared darker, bleaker, less hopeful, less worth living.
If you have a park, it always looks better when it's looked after but we would rather have our own money and buy the things we want than pay to have someone look after our park.
I think Mum was right after all.
0 -
So you're fine if crashing out with no deal leads to avoidable deaths as a consequence?Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
The EU have brought this on themselves with their obsession with political union and the economics on all sides are serious collateral.0 -
I think the answer to that is no one knows for sure. I suspect it would be a return visit to the Supreme Court to decide.algarkirk said:
How sure can we be that the government can revoke Article 50 without parliament's approval? I for one am not as certain as you, given that parliament's approval was legally required to invoke it._Anazina_ said:
Nope. They could unilaterally revoke A50.algarkirk said:Nick Robinson's interview with the Chancellor this morning was extraordinary in that neither acknowledged in a long conversation that 'Taking no deal off the table' is not in the gift of the government. It is outside their power. 'No deal' is, on the contrary, the only outcome that is certainly within government's gift, poisoned chalice though it is. All other outcomes require the cooperation of either parliament, the EU or both.
That might not be palatable to you or them, but to say it is not within their gift is untrue.0 -
Perhaps it happened when people became aware that many experts have feet of clay, and are as partial and partisan as the next man.rottenborough said:
When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc0 -
I am coming to the view that Flint has become a No Dealer, in her desperation to reflect the views of the Don Valley.MarqueeMark said:
BECAUSE there's only nine weeks - if you hold the line on No Deal being the alternative outcome.Dadge said:Hammond's position is just about tenable, since he supports May's WA. But people like Caroline Flint (on last night's This Week) who are against the WA and against the A50 extension - what planet are they on? What power or ability does she have to change the WA to her satisfaction WITHIN NINE WEEKS??
0 -
Except it isn't : at worst a small fall: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/bulletins/businessinvestment/julytoseptember2018revisedresults#industry-analysis-of-business-investmentScott_P said:
That's not entirely true either.stodge said:The point is for whatever reason inadequate planning for the possibility of a LEAVE win was carried out and little thought, it seems, since then, on the possibilities of leaving without a Deal?
Thinking counter-intuitively can be very helpful - imagine the most unlikely thing that could happen, plan for it and work your way toward the more likely and probable options.
The forecast for leaving was that business and investment would flee the UK, so he campaigned against it.
And now business and investment is fleeing the UK.
QED0 -
There’s some serious confirmation bias of pet prejudices going on this morning.SouthamObserver said:
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:
Blair, Clegg and Osborne all went to public school, as did Ken Clarke.0 -
Any price except going to a polling station again...Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/10887545819186298890 -
The French situation isn't quite the same as entrance to the École nationale d'administration (or any of the other Grandes Écoles) is only by ferociously difficult entrance exam. It doesn't matter who your parents are or how much money you have if you're not in the top 1% academically you have no chance of admission. In addition you also have to have an infinite appetite for hard work.Sean_F said:
France has its enarques, and the US their Alumni. Elites are good at perpetuating themselves.tlg86 said:
The nouveau riche are no better when it comes to nepotism.SouthamObserver said:
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:
An undergraduate friend of mine from Aix-Marseille Université was an intellectual titan and he spent two years preparing for the ENA admission. He passed it and eventually became an enao and got assigned the plum billet of the Conseil d'État but he was totally spent by the ENA experience, quit and became a lumberjack in Quebec. He grows marijuana now.0 -
Good point well made Mr Observer #NationalComplimentDaySouthamObserver said:
The most likely outcome is No Deal, because that is the trajectory we are on. For that to change something has to change. And that does not look likely. What seems to be happening now is that a lot of Tories are, in effect, going to positively vote for No Deal, this taking full ownership of its consequences. The Labour leadership can see this and will do absolutely nothing to stop it from happening. It is a gift that in their wildest dreams they could not have imagined possible.algarkirk said:
This is true, but unlike all the other options it is actually in play and there is a possible route to it, and while improbable is less improbable than all the other outcomes. All the outcomes are improbable, because there are too many of them. One of them is going to happen.AlastairMeeks said:The evidence that the deal has any momentum is skimpy, to say the least. We had the same nonsense over Christmas. It wasn't true then and it doesn't look as though it is true now either.
Although I presume you want Jezza to support a Peoples Vote that would still not make it happen.0 -
Correct.TOPPING said:
From the moment you and your fellow travelers voted Leave we were fucked.MarqueeMark said:
Oh, but your approach has panned out so well, huh? You can't run around saying "We are so fucked!" and then say "But my approach, that has led to us being so fucked, must have been the right one!"TOPPING said:
So as the government was assuring business that no deal was out of the question, spending billions upon billions on no deal preparations.MarqueeMark said:
If No Deal really is the shit show we are told, then early and detailed planning would have enabled that case to be made, with great authority. OK, some would still have pooh-poohed it as Establishment scaremongering. But a hell of a lot fewer than are doing so today, on the back of a fag packet, "It will be bad. Very bad" assessment.stodge said:
I was blaming him for the uncertainty not for the Referendum itself. As for "not being able to see the chaos" I have me and the Internet - Cameron had the entire Civil Service machinery to advise and guide him. Perhaps if you'd had a word it would have helped.Roger said:
How can someone who voted Leave blame David Cameron? All he did was your bidding. If you couldn't see the chaos your choices were making why should he?
The point is for whatever reason inadequate planning for the possibility of a LEAVE win was carried out and little thought, it seems, since then, on the possibilities of leaving without a Deal?
Thinking counter-intuitively can be very helpful - imagine the most unlikely thing that could happen, plan for it and work your way toward the more likely and probable options.
Almost every aspect of our interaction with the EEC-->EU has shown up our politicians and civil service to be a clown troupe.
Whatever on earth they would have been.
Although I know you will feel much better once the oppressive foot of EU domination is lifted from your neck.
Sensible Remainers might want to consider why practical Leavers like me have found their commitment to Leaving over the last week turboboosting by the EU’s announcements on tax raising powers, a European army and a reboot of the Franco-German alliance to lead it through.0 -
Perhaps you have not being paying attention. That has already started.Richard_Tyndall said:... The best would be a complete disintegration of faith in the democratic system and a huge rise in support for extremist parties.
The standard Leaver's tactic - a hint of violence to come if they fail to get their way. It is why I view "Leave" as one step away from fascism.Richard_Tyndall said:... and how many actively went out to change things outside the political system.
0 -
We lose our ability to prevent an EU army on 30th March.Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
The EU have brought this on themselves with their obsession with political union and the economics on all sides are serious collateral.
0 -
0
-
Their opponents have also lied and sold snake oil when it’s suited them too.Sean_F said:
The reason is that lots of people think that they're peddling snake oil, but their opponents are purely self-serving.rottenborough said:
Why does anyone listen to a word these people say anymore. They have no more idea about modern trade, supply chains, business, customs rules etc than a 5th century hermit.edmundintokyo said:
I guess I'm not the first person to notice this but it's kind of amazing that these people's whole case for leaving the EU is based on being able to make lots of trade deals in addition to the current EU ones which will be wonderful for the economy, but you can just suddenly exit all the ones you're already in with a couple of months' notice and everything will be fine.Scott_P said:
Presumably that’s ok because it’s intelligent manipulation in pursuit of a higher purpose.0 -
Hard to disagree with this.AlastairMeeks said:The evidence that the deal has any momentum is skimpy, to say the least. We had the same nonsense over Christmas. It wasn't true then and it doesn't look as though it is true now either.
0 -
Is this the essence of gammonism?Richard_Tyndall said:
Me. Still very happy with the decision.Stark_Dawning said:Be honest now. Who doesn't think Brexit has turned out to be utterly ghastly?
0 -
Tom Kibasi's article is worth reading in full.RochdalePioneers said:Great piece by OGH and its correct - No Deal is a burning beacon of hope burnished by people that John Major may have described as "the dispossessed and the never possessed". I get it - things are harder than they should be and people want better. Sure, but here's the problem - it will be a lot worse, not a lot better.
That people don't know that isn't the problem. It's that all of the facts are there to see, all the evidence has been presented, and they are chosing to ignore it. If we do crash out - and I'm now of the view that we will albeit briefly - they won't be celebrating and exercising their bulldog spirit, they will be saying "why's there no fucking food in Tesco"
No political solution is achievable so I expect we will crash out, experience the crushing economic crash briefly, then climb back in to a compromise deal. I've put major customers on "stop" where due to the lack of acceptance of new prices we cease supply of product. It never stays on stop for more than a few days, the lack of products on shelf becomes a far bigger problem than the few percentages points of profit margin being argued over. Will be the same for crash Brexit.
https://www.redpepper.org.uk/dreams-of-a-no-deal-nation/
recken No Deal is on the cards, but will not last long. There will then be a large chorus of I told you so. Automotive and aerospace manufacturing will not die immediately though, it will take some years to wind down to the position of the Australian car industry.0 -
Indeed. Why do you think Leavers would want to take the risk? And why should they?williamglenn said:
Any price except going to a polling station again...Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/10887545819186298890 -
Begs the question as to why their national administration is so poor then.Dura_Ace said:
The French situation isn't quite the same as entrance to the École nationale d'administration (or any of the other Grandes Écoles) is only by ferociously difficult entrance exam. It doesn't matter who your parents are or how much money you have if you're not in the top 1% academically you have no chance of admission. In addition you also have to have an infinite appetite for hard work.Sean_F said:
France has its enarques, and the US their Alumni. Elites are good at perpetuating themselves.tlg86 said:
The nouveau riche are no better when it comes to nepotism.SouthamObserver said:
The entire Brexit exercise shows how good the English public school system is - and how dangerous. It takes the mediocre sons and daughters of the wealthy - people like Rees Mogg, for example - turns them into well-spoken, self-confident adults and deposits them into a career trajectory largely available only to members of that self-same privileged elite. It's brilliant. You can't blame any parent with the wedge for taking advantage of this, but it doesn't half bugger up the country.Stark_Dawning said:
Is astonishing that, in this day and age, by virtue of nothing else other than speaking posh and having good breeding, Rees-Mogg can manoeuvre himself into being British prime minister in all but name.Scott_P said:
An undergraduate friend of mine from Aix-Marseille Université was an intellectual titan and he spent two years preparing for the ENA admission. He passed it and eventually became an enao and got assigned the plum billet of the Conseil d'État but he was totally spent by the ENA experience, quit and became a lumberjack in Quebec. He grows marijuana now.0 -
Let’s be very clear: that word is a racial slur, plain and simple, and every time it’s used it diminishes its user and robs them of any moral authority.Dadge said:
Is this the essence of gammonism?Richard_Tyndall said:
Me. Still very happy with the decision.Stark_Dawning said:Be honest now. Who doesn't think Brexit has turned out to be utterly ghastly?
0 -
Good point. The poll tax, Tory sleaze, the Iraq war, MPs' expenses... There's been a gradual slide towards all-out cynicism.tlg86 said:
When the banks were bailed out.rottenborough said:
When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc0 -
They are looking towards a non-UK membership era. The funny thing is, this game old bird a few years ago got it bang on the money and sensible Leavers should ponder at some length on her words:Casino_Royale said:
Correct.TOPPING said:
From the moment you and your fellow travelers voted Leave we were fucked.MarqueeMark said:
Oh, but your approach has panned out so well, huh? You can't run around saying "We are so fucked!" and then say "But my approach, that has led to us being so fucked, must have been the right one!"TOPPING said:
So as the government was assuring business that no deal was out of the question, spending billions upon billions on no deal preparations.MarqueeMark said:
If No Deal really is the shit show we are told, then early and detailed planning would have enabled that case to be made, with great authority. OK, some would still have pooh-poohed it as Establishment scaremongering. But a hell of a lot fewer than are doing so today, on the back of a fag packet, "It will be bad. Very bad" assessment.stodge said:
I was blaming him for the uncertainty not for the Referendum itself. As for "not being able to see the chaos" I have me and the Internet - Cameron had the entire Civil Service machinery to advise and guide him. Perhaps if you'd had a word it would have helped.Roger said:
How can someone who voted Leave blame David Cameron? All he did was your bidding. If you couldn't see the chaos your choices were making why should he?
The point is for whatever reason inadequate planning for the possibility of a LEAVE win was carried out and little thought, it seems, since then, on the possibilities of leaving without a Deal?
Thinking counter-intuitively can be very helpful - imagine the most unlikely thing that could happen, plan for it and work your way toward the more likely and probable options.
Almost every aspect of our interaction with the EEC-->EU has shown up our politicians and civil service to be a clown troupe.
Whatever on earth they would have been.
Although I know you will feel much better once the oppressive foot of EU domination is lifted from your neck.
Sensible Remainers might want to consider why practical Leavers like me have found their commitment to Leaving over the last week turboboosting by the EU’s announcements on tax raising powers, a European army and a reboot of the Franco-German alliance to lead it through.
"The choice is clear. We can play a role in developing Europe, or we can turn our backs. By turning our backs we would forfeit our right to influence what happens. But what happens will inevitably affect us."0 -
I'm imagining a scenario where you and I are wrong and this parliament, due to its fiendish configuration, cannot get brexit done. As an example, the DUP block any feasible deal by threatening to withdraw confidence in the government. Stasis.algarkirk said:Agree. Except that a GE should not count as doing something, there isn't time and there is no reason to think the result would resolve the central dilemma or propose a new agreed way forward.
The only solution there, although it would not be guaranteed to unblock the pipes, would be to ditch this parliament for a new one - i.e. a general election. That is assuming an article 50 extension would be granted to hold one, of course, otherwise forget it and it's back to these guys.0 -
What risk exactly? Surely the ranks of the Leavers have been swelled in indignation about the latest dastardly Franco-German plans?Casino_Royale said:
Indeed. Why do you think Leavers would want to take the risk? And why should they?williamglenn said:
Any price except going to a polling station again...Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/10887545819186298890 -
Says someone who has used the implied return of violence in NI as an excuse for overturning the referendum.Beverley_C said:
Perhaps you have not being paying attention. That has already started.Richard_Tyndall said:... The best would be a complete disintegration of faith in the democratic system and a huge rise in support for extremist parties.
The standard Leaver's tactic - a hint of violence to come if they fail to get their way. It is why I view "Leave" as one step away from fascism.Richard_Tyndall said:... and how many actively went out to change things outside the political system.
The fascists could take lessons from you and your fellow travellers.0 -
I was slightly nonplussed yesterday by a charming young Spanish radiographer. She said "I do like your trousers, now lower them to your knees..."bigjohnowls said:
I was having a radiological procedure though!
0 -
Good. Why should we prevent it?SouthamObserver said:
We lose our ability to prevent an EU army on 30th March.Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
The EU have brought this on themselves with their obsession with political union and the economics on all sides are serious collateral.0 -
You can argue that any increase or decrease in virtually any budget causes “avoidable deaths” if you’re savvy enough and I’ve seen political opponents of the Conservatives argue that’s the case over the NHS, welfare and policing budgets.AlastairMeeks said:
So you're fine if crashing out with no deal leads to avoidable deaths as a consequence?Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
The EU have brought this on themselves with their obsession with political union and the economics on all sides are serious collateral.
It’s normally just used as a stick to beat one’s political opponents with on policy, and give the user a warm glow of self-righteousness.
For the record, I supported (and still do support) the deal and don’t want No Deal. There is no way on God’s earth I’d do anything to help the Remain side if it did come down to a 2nd Ref, even if the alternative was no deal.0 -
Maybe a price worth paying.Casino_Royale said:
Indeed. Why do you think Leavers would want to take the risk? And why should they?williamglenn said:
Any price except going to a polling station again...Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
I think Leave would win by a bigger margin. #TellThemAgain0 -
BoomTishFoxy said:
I was slightly nonplussed yesterday by a charming young Spanish radiographer. She said "I do like your trousers, now lower them to your knees..."bigjohnowls said:
I was having a radiological procedure though!0 -
Let's be very clear (I can also play at being a po-faced twat): gammonism is a thing. I don't give a stuff if you're offended by the use of this term.Casino_Royale said:
Let’s be very clear: that word is a racial slur, plain and simple, and every time it’s used it diminishes its user and robs them of any moral authority.Dadge said:
Is this the essence of gammonism?Richard_Tyndall said:
Me. Still very happy with the decision.Stark_Dawning said:Be honest now. Who doesn't think Brexit has turned out to be utterly ghastly?
0 -
Yep. All those economic experts who drove the world into recession. A tiny fraction of people saw what was actually happening and got ignored by the 'experts'.tlg86 said:
When the banks were bailed out.rottenborough said:
When did this happen to our country? This utter lack of faith in the opinion of people who actually are involved in the thing they are talking about.Beverley_C said:
Pah! Experts!! What do they know?SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
Can you imagine William Beveridge's famous report on a new welfare state, which sold tens of thousands of copies to the public, now?
"Ah sod off Beveridge, you don't know nothing about poverty or medical services."
"Cradle to the grave? Crap. Just another expert who doesn't live in the real world."
"I didn't fight in the War, so some posh Oxford don could tell me that I need a shilling a week if I am unemployed. Bollocks to him. #poshtwat"
etc etc
Actually it goes even further back than that. It goes back to all those business 'experts' and industry leaders in the 90s going on about what a complete disaster it would be for the UK if we didn't join the Euro. About how they would all leave and inward investment would collapse.
Those 'experts'.0 -
It could go either way. It wouldn’t resolve anything.bigjohnowls said:
Maybe a price worth paying.Casino_Royale said:
Indeed. Why do you think Leavers would want to take the risk? And why should they?williamglenn said:
Any price except going to a polling station again...Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
I think Leave would win by a bigger margin. #TellThemAgain
Both sides are going to have to learn to accept the other in the long term, and address the factors that underlay the original vote, rather than try and grind them into the dust.0 -
The UK will be an integral part of whatever European defence structure supplants NATO whether within or without the EU. Shared strategic challenges and a lack of inclination (especially by the tories) to fund a full spectrum of defence capabilities means it's inevitable.SouthamObserver said:
We lose our ability to prevent an EU army on 30th March.Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
The EU have brought this on themselves with their obsession with political union and the economics on all sides are serious collateral.0 -
Don't be a twat.Richard_Tyndall said:
Says someone who has used the implied return of violence in NI as an excuse for overturning the referendum.Beverley_C said:
Perhaps you have not being paying attention. That has already started.Richard_Tyndall said:... The best would be a complete disintegration of faith in the democratic system and a huge rise in support for extremist parties.
The standard Leaver's tactic - a hint of violence to come if they fail to get their way. It is why I view "Leave" as one step away from fascism.Richard_Tyndall said:... and how many actively went out to change things outside the political system.
The fascists could take lessons from you and your fellow travellers.
If there is a return to a hard border in Northern Ireland there is a very real risk of a resurgence of the troubles. Theresa May has worked out (it doesn't take much working our for non-twats*) that this is not a risk that can be entertained.
*she is of course twattish in other respects.0 -
If - for example - disruption to medical supplies results in avoidable deaths, you can logic-chop as much as you like but blood will be on the hands of no-dealers. It might well be that you are completely ok with that, but if Leavers are prepared to pay any price it would be nice if they acknowledge that they may well be asking people who completely oppose what they are doing to pay that price rather than pick up the tab themselves.Casino_Royale said:
You can argue that any increase or decrease in virtually any budget causes “avoidable deaths” if you’re savvy enough and I’ve seen political opponents of the Conservatives argue that’s the case over the NHS, welfare and policing budgets.AlastairMeeks said:
So you're fine if crashing out with no deal leads to avoidable deaths as a consequence?Casino_Royale said:
Well, quite right. To avoid a single European army (as Verhofstadht pitched this week) or federal EU taxes, Leavers will pay any price.AlastairMeeks said:
It's a death cult, so this will simply bounce off:SouthamObserver said:Someone else with no idea, presumably?
https://twitter.com/edconwaysky/status/1088757969502785538?s=21
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1088754581918629889
The EU have brought this on themselves with their obsession with political union and the economics on all sides are serious collateral.
It’s normally just used as a stick to beat one’s political opponents with on policy, and give the user a warm glow of self-righteousness.
For the record, I supported (and still do support) the deal and don’t want No Deal. There is no way on God’s earth I’d do anything to help the Remain side if it did come down to a 2nd Ref, even if the alternative was no deal.0 -
It's punching up. Deal with it.Casino_Royale said:
Let’s be very clear: that word is a racial slur, plain and simple, and every time it’s used it diminishes its user and robs them of any moral authority.Dadge said:
Is this the essence of gammonism?Richard_Tyndall said:
Me. Still very happy with the decision.Stark_Dawning said:Be honest now. Who doesn't think Brexit has turned out to be utterly ghastly?
Signed. A Gammon.0 -
"Punching up" is just another form of loutishness.TOPPING said:
It's punching up. Deal with it.Casino_Royale said:
Let’s be very clear: that word is a racial slur, plain and simple, and every time it’s used it diminishes its user and robs them of any moral authority.Dadge said:
Is this the essence of gammonism?Richard_Tyndall said:
Me. Still very happy with the decision.Stark_Dawning said:Be honest now. Who doesn't think Brexit has turned out to be utterly ghastly?
Signed. A Gammon.0 -
It is just as likely as any other response. It is Beverley who is claiming that pointing out risks of violence is pandering to fascism. And yet she and you are happy to do the same and pretend it is something different. Stop being such a fucking hypocrite.TOPPING said:
Don't be a twat.Richard_Tyndall said:
Says someone who has used the implied return of violence in NI as an excuse for overturning the referendum.Beverley_C said:
Perhaps you have not being paying attention. That has already started.Richard_Tyndall said:... The best would be a complete disintegration of faith in the democratic system and a huge rise in support for extremist parties.
The standard Leaver's tactic - a hint of violence to come if they fail to get their way. It is why I view "Leave" as one step away from fascism.Richard_Tyndall said:... and how many actively went out to change things outside the political system.
The fascists could take lessons from you and your fellow travellers.
If there is a return to a hard border in Northern Ireland there is a very real risk of a resurgence of the troubles. Theresa May has worked out (it doesn't take much working our for non-twats*) that this is not a risk that can be entertained.
*she is of course twattish in other respects.
0 -
And it turns out she was wrong. Staying in gave us no more influence than leaving in the end.TOPPING said:
"The choice is clear. We can play a role in developing Europe, or we can turn our backs. By turning our backs we would forfeit our right to influence what happens. But what happens will inevitably affect us."0
This discussion has been closed.