politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s big speech – David Herdson’s take
Comments
-
It was certainly a joy not having to deal with the idiocy of Brexit every day. What a golden age the world before June 2016 was.JBriskinindyref2 said:
You were all too busy ramping the joys of the EU as I recall.Chris said:
Maybe we could - if so many people hadn't been telling them at the time how naive they were being.JBriskinindyref2 said:
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
When people voted in the referendum they knew that after two years we left with or without a deal and that any extra time was not in the UKs gift. You cannot have voted leave without embracing the possibility of no deal. It is a logical impossibility.eek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."0 -
A deal that's been rejected 3 times by parliament.david_herdson said:
I assume that's posted in irony but on the off-chance it's not, Vote Leave consistently criticised the EU for putting ideology and politics ahead of pragmatism, the economy and subsidiarity. Of all the people involved, they have least scope to complain about how the EU has acted.JBriskinindyref2 said:
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
Wheneek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
Besides, there is a deal.
It's time to inact the 2016 referendum result.
Halloween Brexit it is.0 -
On the topic of OJ's attack being a false flag.
1. I think immediately jumping to that conclusion is probably not wise.
2. Given that every other post-2010 left wing yoof polemicist has (a) over egged the pudding and (b) been caught out, OJ will be in a minority if he's being completely truthful here.
RIP Johann Hari, we barely knew ye0 -
I presume you are talking England and Wales and that whilst not mentioned Scotland is independent and in the EU. Given no mention that voters would have split 4 ways otherwise.rcs1000 said:On the optimism thing, I am reminded of Barbara Ehrenreich's outstanding (if depressing) Bright-Sided.
In it, she makes the case that modern parenting's relentless positivity and reinforcement of "you can do anything!" is messing our children up. Giving kids the idea that they can become NASA scientists, when their maths aren't good enough for them to become Accountants, isn't helping them, it's giving them unrealistic expectations and setting them up to be disappointed later.
With that in mind, here's my brief forecast for the next four years.
No Deal happens, and catastrophe does not.
Boris Johnson calls a General Election, which he wins reasonably well thanks to a split opposition, and optimism. (Say a 50-60 seat majority.)
The world enters recession, a consequence of the natural stage of the economic cycle we are in, and the Trump trade wars. Britain does not sign an FTA with the US, because it turns out that British and American farmers do not share a common vision.
Our exports splutter (mostly due to the world economy, but excarbated by No Deal Brexit), and - thanks to already overstretched consumers and close to zero interest rates - there is much less room to get people spending than previously. UK house prices fall, thanks to lack of demand from immigrating foreigners and rising unemployment at home.
The UK enters a nasty three year recession, which is not as deep as 2007/2008, but is longer due to our lack of policy responses. (Mortgage rates can't go negative.)
Talks with the EU resume, but they demand that we agree to the billions in the Withdrawal Agreement and to something equivalent to the Backstop in Northern Ireland. The Conservative Party can't accept this.
The British people see all the problems with the British economy as due to Brexit (they're not), but most people aren't very good at complex cause and effect. The country gets ever more polarised, between those affected by the ongoing recession, and those for whom sovereignty is more important.
British voters split three ways: the socialist Labour Party, telling all that the ills of the economy are the result of nasty capitalists and capitalism; the patriotic Conservative Party who tells people that Paradise is just Postponed; and the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, who promise that everything will just be alright if we rejoin.0 -
Comrade Corbyn will be generous with the undeserved wealth that will be seized from the capitalists and used to furnish the proletariat with joy unbounded!0
-
Ha, they'll just say the sort of nonsense that all politicians come out with. "We'll give those greedy big businesses a long overdue kicking, whilst simultaneously doing no harm whatsoever to your private pensions".david_herdson said:
That might be the intention. I wonder whether it'd be politically sustainable once campaigns that put real numbers on how much the policy "steals from your pension" start?rottenborough said:
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.0 -
Boris is not at all interested in doing a deal. If he was, DExEU would have already published detailed, legally-drafted proposals for the revisions to the WA that they want, to enable discussion and agreement. Where are they?kinabalu said:
I think that IS the plan but I don't see it being possible by 31 Oct. An extension into 2020 will be agreed, I think. I am not persuaded by 'Do or Die!" - but luckily for Boris, most people do appear to be.algarkirk said:Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.
The political strategy is to leave without a deal but to blame others for the negative consequences of that outcome, while taking credit for having delivered on the promise.0 -
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.Icarus said:No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
0 -
Trick or treat, Brisky?JBriskinindyref2 said:
A deal that's been rejected 3 times by parliament.david_herdson said:
I assume that's posted in irony but on the off-chance it's not, Vote Leave consistently criticised the EU for putting ideology and politics ahead of pragmatism, the economy and subsidiarity. Of all the people involved, they have least scope to complain about how the EU has acted.JBriskinindyref2 said:
How were Vote Leave to know that the EU would act in such bad faith? No Article 50 had been delivered before. I think we can forgive them for their naivety.AlastairMeeks said:
Your argument is bunk. Vote Leave's entire prospectus was built around them delivering a deal. The fact that their prospectus has been shown to be a shambles does not legitimise them implementing a still more extreme version of their mad obsession.algarkirk said:
Perhaps what Vote Leave said was in the strictest sense true, but as was made clear, would require both parties to want it. Not a safe basis for voting. Art 50 is short, clear and to the point and my argument is sound!AlastairMeeks said:FPT:
algarkirk said:
Wheneek said:
They stated that we wouldn't be leaving without a deal.RobD said:
The Leave campaign said there wouldn’t be an end to freedom of movement? Or that it wouldn’t affect the people already in the UK?Cyclefree said:
This proposal is a complete breach of the very clear promise made by the official Leave campaign during the referendum. So yet another example of them trying to do something for which they have no mandate.Chris said:
What an utter shambles.dixiedean said:Boris and Priti lining up another hostage to fortune re ending free movement overnight.
The deadline for applications for settled status is December. How many trust the Home Office to process the applications in an efficient, orderly, fair and consistent manner? Hands up? How many expect to see landlords, employers and employees tied up in the Courts for months and years?
Why isn’t the press picking them up on this?
Vote Leave explicitly denied that triggering Article 50 was required, see here:
http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_newdeal.html
"We do not necessarily have to use Article 50 - we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests."
Besides, there is a deal.
It's time to inact the 2016 referendum result.
Halloween Brexit it is.
0 -
Coming down, as a share of GDP.SandyRentool said:
Where is the national debt?Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
But Labour can't criticise both that the deficit reduction was too slow ("debt is too high"), and that it was too fast ("austerity!!"). They do need to get their story straight.0 -
There does seem to be tacit agreement amongst the two biggest Parties that economic realities shall be ignored for the time being.glw said:
Ha, they'll just say the sort of nonsense that all politicians come out with. "We'll give those greedy big businesses a long overdue kicking, whilst simultaneously doing no harm whatsoever to your private pensions".david_herdson said:
That might be the intention. I wonder whether it'd be politically sustainable once campaigns that put real numbers on how much the policy "steals from your pension" start?rottenborough said:
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.0 -
Why? Boris has stated that we leave on October 31st so Boris is going to have to find more than a fig leaf for Labour and co to vote for it...algarkirk said:
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.eek said:Mentioned in the previous thread but worth repeating
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1163395649909514240
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed.
Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.0 -
Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.eristdoof said:
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.Icarus said:No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
0 -
Austerity was not necessary to bring the deficit down, and may have hindered it. Economic growth is what was needed.david_herdson said:
Coming down, as a share of GDP.SandyRentool said:
Where is the national debt?Currystardog said:
So where is the deficit now say compared to when Labour were last in power?not_on_fire said:The Tories have lost any ability to criticise Labour for excessive spending. The billions spunked up the wall on Brexit and no-deal preparations are far worse uses of money than any of Labour’s proposals.
But Labour can't criticise both that the deficit reduction was too slow ("debt is too high"), and that it was too fast ("austerity!!"). They do need to get their story straight.0 -
The Danish mortgage market works very differently to the UK one. All mortgages there are packaged up into bonds and sold onto the open market. (In fact, it is a legal requirement of mortgage lender that they sell them on.)JBriskinindyref2 said:"The record-low mortgage rates, which don’t take into account the fees that homeowners pay their banks, are the latest reflection of the global shift in the monetary environment as central banks delay plans to remove stimulus amid concerns about economic growth."
I think they're negative - as previously stated they were talking about it on the World Service last night , where they warned that Asset prices could drop being your worry
So the way it works is that you turn up at your local mortgage bank, and they agree a mortgage with you. It is then packaged with other mortgages of similar rating, and immediately sold at auction.
Now, when people are particularly pessimistic, bond yields on some mortgage bonds - even at auction - can go negative. But this is very different to someone getting a negative interest rate on their debt. If the bank charged you what it sold the mortgage bonds for it would make a substantial loss. It has to originate the loan, it has to service the loan, and it takes all the costs in the event of forclosure.
Not only that, but in most cases the customer doesn't actually care what the bond is sold for. You see, the bank charges you (say) 1% on your mortgage. Those 1% bonds are then auctioned off. If investors pay (say) 112 for your package of bonds yielding 1%, then they are getting a negative yield. That is very different from the end customer paying a negative yield.
From the article:
“During this week’s auctions, there were three times when I had to stand back a little from the screen and raise my eyebrows somewhat,” said Jeppe Borre, who analyzes the mortgage-bond market from a unit of the Nykredit group that dominates Denmark’s $450 billion home-loan industry.
For one-year adjustable-rate mortgage bonds, Nykredit’s refinancing auctions resulted in a negative rate of 0.23%. The three-year rate was minus 0.28%, while the five-year rate was minus 0.04%.0 -
Or, alternatively, deflect the blame if leaving is prevented by the actions of others.david_herdson said:
Boris is not at all interested in doing a deal. If he was, DExEU would have already published detailed, legally-drafted proposals for the revisions to the WA that they want, to enable discussion and agreement. Where are they?kinabalu said:
I think that IS the plan but I don't see it being possible by 31 Oct. An extension into 2020 will be agreed, I think. I am not persuaded by 'Do or Die!" - but luckily for Boris, most people do appear to be.algarkirk said:Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained. The no deal talk from government is about getting a deal. The more apocalyptic horrors are put into our vision, the more obvious it is that parliament should vote for something very like the deal it has foolishly rejected, once Boris has hurriedly placed a slender fig leaf on it.
The political strategy is to leave without a deal but to blame others for the negative consequences of that outcome, while taking credit for having delivered on the promise.0 -
This is very disingenuous. You can't turn around after 3 years during which Madam May eschewed any attempt at consensus or compromise and then hector the Labour Party for not suddenly jumping on her ship.algarkirk said:
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained.eek said:Mentioned in the previous thread but worth repeating
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1163395649909514240
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed.
Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.
Look to your own house. The nut job ERG are responsible for the failure of her Brexit plan. If they'd have all supported it, it would have passed.0 -
The problem for the Tories now is that the "Corbyn's magic money-tree" argument holds less persuasion when your own party advocates fully rogering large sections of the economy on the insane altar of a no-deal Brexit0
-
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.RobD said:Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.0 -
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
Anything wrong with that?
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.0 -
No, but what I think they WILL do is agree an extension for fresh talks with no pre-conditions.Pulpstar said:Boris and the Heartbreakers. The EU won't back down.
This will be spun by Johnson as a victory and one made possible by the strength of his leadership.
The time will then be used to apply lipstick to the pig and take it back to market.
Election in spring 2020 whether he gets a sale or not.0 -
The trouble is Parliament has decided that it doesn't want to sort that one out.david_herdson said:Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
0 -
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.glw said:
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.RobD said:Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
0 -
Mr. (Miss? Sorry, I forget) Rose, the 'nutjob ERG' and the Labour Party voted the same way: against the deal.
If the ERG are nuts, why are they and Labour of the same opinion regarding the deal?0 -
Brexiteers have a plan for thatkyf_100 said:
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.glw said:
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.RobD said:Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.0 -
What about people that have a degree and have paid their loan off in full ?kyf_100 said:
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.glw said:
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.RobD said:Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.0 -
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.0 -
Of course you can leg it to avoid your debts, but it's not really a great plan long term, and I don't think many people would leave to avoid paying a bit more tax.kyf_100 said:
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.glw said:
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.RobD said:Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.0 -
Mr. Pulpstar, indeed.
Retrospective taxation of that nature would be a fantastic way to seriously irritate millions of people.
If they're making more due to their degree they'll pay a higher rate of tax. If they're not doing that well, they shouldn't be taxed more.0 -
OK then, the parents of graduates with loans to repay won't be very happy that their children are still having to repay when new students get tuition fees paid. But no doubt Labour will write tuition fee loans off - for the Many not the Few!eristdoof said:
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.Icarus said:No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
0 -
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!!!!not_on_fire said:
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?
0 -
Agreed. And if it cannot, you have a General Election to change Parliament.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
Anything wrong with that?
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
0 -
Okay - apparently you have more knowledge than me. Second time I've been caught out by late night World Service listening.rcs1000 said:
The Danish mortgage market works very differently to the UK one. All mortgages there are packaged up into bonds and sold onto the open market. (In fact, it is a legal requirement of mortgage lender that they sell them on.)JBriskinindyref2 said:"The record-low mortgage rates, which don’t take into account the fees that homeowners pay their banks, are the latest reflection of the global shift in the monetary environment as central banks delay plans to remove stimulus amid concerns about economic growth."
I think they're negative - as previously stated they were talking about it on the World Service last night , where they warned that Asset prices could drop being your worry
So the way it works is that you turn up at your local mortgage bank, and they agree a mortgage with you. It is then packaged with other mortgages of similar rating, and immediately sold at auction.
Now, when people are particularly pessimistic, bond yields on some mortgage bonds - even at auction - can go negative. But this is very different to someone getting a negative interest rate on their debt. If the bank charged you what it sold the mortgage bonds for it would make a substantial loss. It has to originate the loan, it has to service the loan, and it takes all the costs in the event of forclosure.
Not only that, but in most cases the customer doesn't actually care what the bond is sold for. You see, the bank charges you (say) 1% on your mortgage. Those 1% bonds are then auctioned off. If investors pay (say) 112 for your package of bonds yielding 1%, then they are getting a negative yield. That is very different from the end customer paying a negative yield.
From the article:
“During this week’s auctions, there were three times when I had to stand back a little from the screen and raise my eyebrows somewhat,” said Jeppe Borre, who analyzes the mortgage-bond market from a unit of the Nykredit group that dominates Denmark’s $450 billion home-loan industry.
For one-year adjustable-rate mortgage bonds, Nykredit’s refinancing auctions resulted in a negative rate of 0.23%. The three-year rate was minus 0.28%, while the five-year rate was minus 0.04%.0 -
It won't steal from state sector pensions and Labour/Socialist Worker believes that state employees are the only employees who matter. Anyone in the private sector can go fu*k themselves.david_herdson said:
That might be the intention. I wonder whether it'd be politically sustainable once campaigns that put real numbers on how much the policy "steals from your pension" start?rottenborough said:
Don't forget the nationalisation wont cost much according to Labour as they do not intend to pay the market rate.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.0 -
Boris surely needs to have something eye catching on tuition fees.
Graduate tax is far more presentable - I'm surprised Govt hasn't moved to this in the last two years. I know they're doing a review but they've been far too slow.
Boris is going to have to address this quickly now. At a minimum he'll need clear, easy to understand proposals in Con manifesto.0 -
No problem. This is all also true. As a centrist moderate that's all obvious. The difference is that the ERG - wrong as they are - voted how they believed. Labour leavers are not content to crash out and made sure TMs deal didn't go through for party political reasons. I think ERG believed they were serving the national interest (though they are IMO wrong), many Labour MPs knew they were not.Mysticrose said:
This is very disingenuous. You can't turn around after 3 years during which Madam May eschewed any attempt at consensus or compromise and then hector the Labour Party for not suddenly jumping on her ship.algarkirk said:
Just a quick reminder that our government's policy is to leave with a deal and that we would have one already if Labour leavers had abstained.eek said:Mentioned in the previous thread but worth repeating
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1163395649909514240
I believe the current No Deal viewpoints conjugate around this question. For those who don't see No Deal being an issue the Operation Yellowhammer issues are self contained so can be fixed.
Personally, No Deal is likely to be set of disasters that build upon one another - issue a and issue b combine to make issues c and d far far worse than they would otherwise have been.
Look to your own house. The nut job ERG are responsible for the failure of her Brexit plan. If they'd have all supported it, it would have passed.
0 -
If people voted to leave would it not also be reasonable for them to expect to leave on the basis that the leave campaigns promised? How is it any more "democratic" to ask people to vote leave on the basis that there would be a deal only to turn round and try to take us out of the EU without a deal?Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA would have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Both No deal and revoke need the legitimacy of a seconded referendum if they are to have a proper mandate. Leaving with a deal is the only route that doesn't.0 -
Which it can't so the default position should be status quo/remain, or another referendum that defines what sort of Leave the 52% thought they were voting for. If those in favour of Brexit really did believe in democracy they would agree to this.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracy
Anything wrong with that?
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.0 -
If we could hook Boris and Corbyn up to lie detectors I expect that we would discover that Corbyn is keener on hard Brexit than Boris.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Labour’s policy was to Brexit in accordance with Vote Leave’s promises.Currystardog said:
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!!!!not_on_fire said:
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We could have a referendum every day. It would be highly democratic, but very impractical. As a kind of compromise, we and instead say something along these lines: 'You know that referendum we had three years ago and which we haven't implemented yet.......Shall we do a rain check on it? People may have changed their minds and in any case we all know a lot more about the matter than we did then. Since the outcome will affect us for generations to come, it might be as well to put it to the people again to see if Their Will is still reflected in what is proposed, and to reassure ourselves that what we are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?0 -
not_on_fire said:kyf_100 said:
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.glw said:
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.RobD said:Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
You will only be allowed to take £20 in cash out of the country
Brexiteers have a plan for that0 -
I assume Nick Timothy or Fiona Hill won't be let anywhere near the manifesto this timeMikeL said:Boris surely needs to have something eye catching on tuition fees.
Graduate tax is far more presentable - I'm surprised Govt hasn't moved to this in the last two years. I know they're doing a review but they've been far too slow.
Boris is going to have to address this quickly now. At a minimum he'll need clear, easy to understand proposals in Con manifesto.
? 0 -
I like the WA because it's hated both by remainers and leavers. That makes it an absolubte winner in my book.2
-
You would probably find Boris is less keen on any kind of Brexit than Dominic Grieve! We would see a complete volte face if Boris thought it would lose him the leadershipglw said:
If we could hook Boris and Corbyn up to lie detectors I expect that we would discover that Corbyn is keener on hard Brexit than Boris.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?0 -
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!not_on_fire said:
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We c are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]0 -
The counter to this is that everyone ends up paying to give these particular students an advantage in life. And yes, some degrees have a value to society that is worthy of the investment. But there are too many that don't.eristdoof said:
Not many "future students" vote, but parents of "future students" do, and most would be very happy if their son/daughter could avoid a 27 000 pound debt.Icarus said:No tuition fees is going to be very popular ...... with future students. Students who had and those who still have student loans to pay off will not be very happy unless they get a refund!
I want everyone to get a degree if that is appropriate for them - but the cost should not entirely be on the state.0 -
Always party before country for Labour. Always.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?0 -
If there were not widely differing interpretations of the Referendum result we wouldn't be in this fix.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?0 -
No, someone far worse, and his name is Dominic and his Cummings are all over Boris's manifestoPulpstar said:
I assume Nick Timothy or Fiona Hill won't be let anywhere near the manifesto this timeMikeL said:Boris surely needs to have something eye catching on tuition fees.
Graduate tax is far more presentable - I'm surprised Govt hasn't moved to this in the last two years. I know they're doing a review but they've been far too slow.
Boris is going to have to address this quickly now. At a minimum he'll need clear, easy to understand proposals in Con manifesto. ?0 -
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).AlastairMeeks said:
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
0 -
No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
Now what?0 -
Peter_the_Punter said:
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
0 -
I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal0 -
Mr. Punter, it remains odd that Cameron never had the official Leave campaign put forward a basic framework (ie leaving the customs union and so on). It would've been eminently sensible *and* helped his own side.
That said, we are where we are. And that's, post-result, due to delinquent MPs voting in perverse ways.0 -
True of the current Party, and also the current Conservative Party, which also happens to be the Government. One despairs.Pulpstar said:
Always party before country for Labour. Always.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?0 -
Brexit is a religion, only much less rational, and without all the laughsPeter_the_Punter said:
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:
So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!not_on_fire said:
I agree, the democratic vote that removed the Commons majority for the Brexit-supporting government must be followed. And it is.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.Peter_the_Punter said:
We c are doing is in fact what They Willed about three years ago, and not some distortion of it.'Currystardog said:
So all referendums should now be ignored? People voted for Brexit, it is completely undemocratic to ignore that vote. Its odd that a post stating that we should respect democracy is now deemed as strange!not_on_fire said:
What a strange post. They are advocating re-running a three year old referendum whose outcome is now very different from what the winning side promised, if enough people, er, vote for them.Currystardog said:
Don't they have democrat in their name, yet they are advocating ignoring democracyPulpstar said:
If everyone had listened to Richard Nabavi and voted Tory in 2017 we'd be out this mess most likely as the WA wouldr have sailed through.rottenborough said:FFS, let's get this GE election over and done with. It is needed.
I think the correct course of action now is to probably vote Lib Dem despite their unwillingness to compromise over Brexit as its heading towards No Deal, Corbyn or "No Brexit".
Much as it grates to go against a 17.6 million vote only 3 years ago, given where we are now the Lib Dem vote looks the most sensible to me. I'd have preferred the WA to be passed, but it looks dead right now... as someone once said I wouldn't have started from here.
Anything wrong with that?
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]0 -
I have just done this and the idea the "kurs" (bond price) doesn't matter is incorrect - I remortgaged at 1% fixed for 30 years instead of 0.5% because when I borrow I have to sell the bonds - if the bonds are only being sold at 95 then I have to sell more to raise the correct money for the mortgage whereas on the 1% loan I got 99.98 - I have to buy them back at 100 still. There is a fee on top of the nominal mortgage rate for the management etc. I found the whole process baffling at first but this unique system works well.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Okay - apparently you have more knowledge than me. Second time I've been caught out by late night World Service listening.rcs1000 said:
The Danish mortgage market works very differently to the UK one. All mortgages there are packaged up into bonds and sold onto the open market. (In fact, it is a legal requirement of mortgage lender that they sell them on.)JBriskinindyref2 said:"The record-low mortgage rates, which don’t take into account the fees that homeowners pay their banks, are the latest reflection of the global shift in the monetary environment as central banks delay plans to remove stimulus amid concerns about economic growth."
I think they're negative - as previously stated they were talking about it on the World Service last night , where they warned that Asset prices could drop being your worry
So the way it works is that you turn up at your local mortgage bank, and they agree a mortgage with you. It is then packaged with other mortgages of similar rating, and immediately sold at auction.
Now, when people are particularly pessimistic, bond yields on some mortgage bonds - even at auction - can go negative. But this is very different to someone getting a negative interest rate on their debt. If the bank charged you what it sold the mortgage bonds for it would make a substantial loss. It has to originate the loan, it has to service the loan, and it takes all the costs in the event of forclosure.
Not only that, but in most cases the customer doesn't actually care what the bond is sold for. You see, the bank charges you (say) 1% on your mortgage. Those 1% bonds are then auctioned off. If investors pay (say) 112 for your package of bonds yielding 1%, then they are getting a negative yield. That is very different from the end customer paying a negative yield.
From the article:
“During this week’s auctions, there were three times when I had to stand back a little from the screen and raise my eyebrows somewhat,” said Jeppe Borre, who analyzes the mortgage-bond market from a unit of the Nykredit group that dominates Denmark’s $450 billion home-loan industry.
For one-year adjustable-rate mortgage bonds, Nykredit’s refinancing auctions resulted in a negative rate of 0.23%. The three-year rate was minus 0.28%, while the five-year rate was minus 0.04%.0 -
Exactly, Politicians have deliberately disrespected the referendum result whilst claiming that they are not. They cannot be allowed to get away with doing this. It is a complete affront to democracy.algarkirk said:
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).AlastairMeeks said:
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.0 -
Nigel_Foremain said:not_on_fire said:kyf_100 said:
If everyone in the UK who has a degree has to pay an additional tax, it's rather easy to avoid that tax by leaving the country.glw said:
I would introduce a graduate tax that deliberately collects more than the loans* do, I think a government could spin it as fairer and gain wide support for it.RobD said:Just call it a graduate tax and be done with it. I think you could also get away with a lower rate if it was always charged, rather than being a fixed amount to repay.
* Yes, I know it sort of is a tax anyway.
You will only be allowed to take £20 in cash out of the country
Brexiteers have a plan for that
Leaving the country avoids the loan repayment too.0 -
Is this what now passes for political debate ?david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
We’re arguing about which of two lying arses is slightly less mendacious and irresponsible.
0 -
He really didn't think it through very well, did he.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Punter, it remains odd that Cameron never had the official Leave campaign put forward a basic framework (ie leaving the customs union and so on). It would've been eminently sensible *and* helped his own side.
That said, we are where we are. And that's, post-result, due to delinquent MPs voting in perverse ways.
I always thought he was on the whole a pretty decent PM, but my word he got that one wrong.0 -
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.Pulpstar said:
Always party before country for Labour. Always.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?0 -
There is not the slightest plausible evidence that the government is seeking a deal. Far from it: it is trashing the only deal that is currently available and making no steps to identify an alternative one.algarkirk said:
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).AlastairMeeks said:
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
There is no mandate for no deal. And since there is no mandate for no deal, a new mandate is required if the government is to lead the country down that path.0 -
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.Beibheirli_C said:Peter_the_Punter said:
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.0 -
I think 17.4 million people may well be more responsible.justin124 said:
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.Pulpstar said:
Always party before country for Labour. Always.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
They had a choice and chose to leave0 -
Mr. Icarus, makes the Varadkar position all the dafter.
"We must have the backstop, which will prevent a hard border. Although it hasn't passed the Commons, and without a deal, there will be a hard border."
Mr. Punter, he was complacent, which to a large extent I can understand (I always thought Remain would win 60/40 at a canter). That said, it was a very obvious step.
Mr. Meeks, let's assume for the sake of argument you're right about the lack of mandate for no deal (that's open to debate): what would you see as the optimal route in the Commons being?0 -
I think May at the end genuinely was putting country before party. The 30 or so Labour backbenchers who (Who knows ?) support the deal should probably have compromised at that point (MV3). Clegg certainly put country above party when it came to the 2010-15 ministry. Johnson won't.justin124 said:
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.Pulpstar said:
Always party before country for Labour. Always.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?0 -
https://news.sky.com/story/northern-ireland-dissident-republicans-blamed-as-police-targeted-by-explosive-11771859Icarus said:No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
Now what?0 -
-
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal0 -
Yeah maybe on PB. In the real world I think you'll find most people are just BOB (bored of Brexit)Peter_the_Punter said:
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.Beibheirli_C said:Peter_the_Punter said:
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.0 -
It means that however long it takes at some point, somewhere, an irresistible force meets an immovable object.Icarus said:No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
Now what?
That is exactly why this drama is so compelling. It has the element I mentioned, + it is essentially non-violent and democratic, and it touches vital interests.
Compare this with the stultifying epic of Hong Kong where there is an irresistible force but no countervailing immovable object, just heroic people who may be the object of pitiless terror at some point when there is nothing we can do about it.
Suppose, counterfactually, the USA said to China 'If you move in Hong Kong we regard it as an act of war and will attack' it would then generate the sort of passion that irresistible force/immovable object issues get.
0 -
Extend the Article 50 notice to the end of the year and hold a general election, where all parties can set out their wares on what to do next about Brexit.Morris_Dancer said:
Mr. Meeks, let's assume for the sake of argument you're right about the lack of mandate for no deal (that's open to debate): what would you see as the optimal route in the Commons being?0 -
They don't want it, but the consequences are relatively small for them. Of course if it is really true that No Deal won't be that bad for us, think how inconsequential it will be for them!eek said:
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
Hardly worth negotiating over.....0 -
Public opinion may not see it that wayeek said:
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
0 -
If the WA gets approved, what are we implementing up to 31st Dec 2020?Icarus said:No deal means no implementation period. No implementation period means that there will be a hard border in Ireland. The UK and Irish governments have signed a binding treaty that there wont be a hard border.
Now what?0 -
In for a non-existent penny, in for a non-existent pound.Nigelb said:
Is this what now passes for political debate ?david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
We’re arguing about which of two lying arses is slightly less mendacious and irresponsible.
If both parties are using 1 or more magic money trees then neither will really be able to do much to criticise the other over it. Maybe lib dems can get some mileage by portraying themselves as the only ones with a fully costed manifesto.0 -
JBriskinindyref2 said:
Yeah maybe on PB. In the real world I think you'll find most people are just BOB (bored of Brexit)Peter_the_Punter said:
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.Beibheirli_C said:Peter_the_Punter said:
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
In my real world too, Brisk, but that doesn't mean they will be bored with the consequences.JBriskinindyref2 said:
Yeah maybe on PB. In the real world I think you'll find most people are just BOB (bored of Brexit)Peter_the_Punter said:
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.Beibheirli_C said:Peter_the_Punter said:
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.0 -
I have a strange feeling that if 'Leave with no deal' won the GE with say 41% of the vote (which in current circumstances could be a crushing victory) it would not quite end the discussion, including with Mr Meeks! (And it would be very dull if it did).AlastairMeeks said:
Extend the Article 50 notice to the end of the year and hold a general election, where all parties can set out their wares on what to do next about Brexit.Morris_Dancer said:
Mr. Meeks, let's assume for the sake of argument you're right about the lack of mandate for no deal (that's open to debate): what would you see as the optimal route in the Commons being?
0 -
"But the MMT people are just wrong in believing that the only question you need to ask about the budget deficit is whether it supplies the right amount of aggregate demand; financeability matters too, even with fiat money."david_herdson said:
Mayor Pete was quite good on the deficit these last couple of days. If he carries on like that he'll have no chance.rottenborough said:
It is called MMT - Modern Monetary Theory. If Corbyn wins then UK will be the testing laboratory for this new idea*, which basically involves printing money. US may follow if Dems win.david_herdson said:
The Johnson pledges are irresponsible enough, and not leaving without the disruption of No Deal would help, but it's an entire magic money forest Corbyn needs to pick to fund what he's promising.TheScreamingEagles said:David Herdson: There were *a lot* of very expensive pledges in his speech:
- Free university tuition
- Renationalisation of key industries
- "Ending austerity" i.e. major increases in day-to-day spending
How will this all be paid for?
Answer: It'll be paid from the same magic money tree that Johnson is funding his pledges from.
Plus there's the 'Brexit dividend'.
* Well, they say 'new' but I have a vague sense I've seen this one before.
But I fear you may be right. It's that long since Britain's had proper inflation that the threat of its return may well be wished away as scaremongering or at the least, downplayed far too far.
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/mmt-again/0 -
How does a transition period work - it's a hard and fast separation to WTO tariffs on the EU's side (because they have to).Big_G_NorthWales said:
Public opinion may not see it that wayeek said:
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal0 -
From the Book of Johnson:Greater self-love has no man than this; that he should back-stab his friends for his careerPulpstar said:
I think May at the end genuinely was putting country before party. The 30 or so Labour backbenchers who (Who knows ?) support the deal should probably have compromised at that point (MV3). Clegg certainly put country above party when it came to the 2010-15 ministry. Johnson won't.justin124 said:
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.Pulpstar said:
Always party before country for Labour. Always.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?0 -
From a different, far better age of politicians:
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/11634381490513223740 -
Mr. eek, yes and no.
British MPs have voted in stupid ways, contrary to what the majority of them actually want.
That said, the EU has seen the 'deal' fail three times and refuse to change anything.
Mr. Meeks, interesting, though it's entirely possible we'd end up with an even more hung Parliament (if one views hungness as a spectrum rather than a binary state that's present or absent).
Things can always be worse.0 -
-
+1 I enjoyed a mini-break in NI last week. But some people like sun and more heat. I like holidaying in the UK but come November i am going to the Canary islands for the slightly longer daylight hours and the latent warmth of summer defusing from the seas.Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal0 -
How?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Public opinion may not see it that wayeek said:
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal0 -
eek said:
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
Hang on, they need us more than we need them, shurely!! Project fear I tell you.
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal0 -
Where was the obsession with "mandate" when the government of the day ratified Lisbon without a manifesto despite their manifesto pledging the opposite?AlastairMeeks said:
There is not the slightest plausible evidence that the government is seeking a deal. Far from it: it is trashing the only deal that is currently available and making no steps to identify an alternative one.algarkirk said:
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).AlastairMeeks said:
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
There is no mandate for no deal. And since there is no mandate for no deal, a new mandate is required if the government is to lead the country down that path.
How come the issue about "mandate" only occurs when its an issue that worries you?0 -
Legally there can be no transition [ officially ] if there is no WA. Otherwise other WTO members could complain. But the UK is going to break WTO rules anyway as the official HMRC document states that trucks will be allowed in from the EU without any checks and shippers will have to lodge both duty and VAT paperwork afterwards [ much like we do today with INTRASTAT which only applies with trade volume and value ]eek said:
How does a transition period work - it's a hard and fast separation to WTO tariffs on the EU's side (because they have to).Big_G_NorthWales said:
Public opinion may not see it that wayeek said:
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal
0 -
True for the 2016 referendum, but not as a general rule.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.
It's perfectly possible - indeed fairly common - to have a fully drafted piece of legislation and ask simply whether or not to sign the secondary legislation saying "this comes into effect on 1st January".
That obviously wasn't possible for the 2016 referendum, because the EU simply weren't going to negotiate a deal to leave on the basis Britain might leave - it'd be an awful waste of time and set a terrible precedent.
A second referendum could (and perhaps should) have been baked in from the start ("if you vote Leave, we'll negotiate and then put the Leave deal to you in a second referendum"). But Cameron didn't expect to lose, and also would have felt that such an arrangement would make a Leave vote more likely (and I suspect it would as it would have reduced the fear factor). And, given it wasn't baked in, I can see why Leavers now see it as sneaky whereas they'd probably have accepted it at the time.0 -
-
I have joined the "Shrug" Cult. These days I just shrug and say "Go on then... do it and see what happens" because, quite frankly, a lot of people only learn the hard way.Peter_the_Punter said:
It is extraordinary how the cultishness cuts across traditional ties. I really cannot think of any historic parallel since the Civil War, when brother fought against brother across the parliamentary divide.Beibheirli_C said:Peter_the_Punter said:
And they have been unable to deliver. So now what do you do?Currystardog said:So 86% of people voted for parties that said they would respect the referendum and ensure Brexit happened!
The default position is No Deal, but that has the support of less than half of the public, and MPs. It is also widely believed to be an extremely damging course of action for the country as a whole.
You wish to proceed? [Please don't mutter 'Will Of The People' , like some religious incantation. This is real life, with real consequences.]
Brexit is a secular religion and religious zealots never depend on reason. They follow dogma and show their piety via unwavering belief.
No one has ever answered me in even the slightest detail how putting up barriers to our major export market makes the UK richer, safer and better.
All I get is horsesh*t about how we can shiver in electric brownouts / blackouts but at least we will have our blue passports.
One complete fool on here even told me that "Yes - it may be a disaster, but at least we chose do to it"
0 -
Good but worrying examples, Pulpstar. Neither May nor Clegg reaped much reward for putting the Country first.Pulpstar said:
I think May at the end genuinely was putting country before party. The 30 or so Labour backbenchers who (Who knows ?) support the deal should probably have compromised at that point (MV3). Clegg certainly put country above party when it came to the 2010-15 ministry. Johnson won't.justin124 said:
Labour must be following the splendid example given by Cameron and the Tory party. He called the Referendum for reasons of party advantage - no national interest there. This entire mess is down to him. Then Theresa May called the 2017 election for reasons of political gain - even though things did not go to plan.Pulpstar said:
Always party before country for Labour. Always.Currystardog said:
Yet politicians (mainly Labour) voted against the deal, how is that respecting the referendum result?
0 -
Personally, i always critised Brown because he had no mandate. I critised May in 2016 and Boris now...Philip_Thompson said:
Where was the obsession with "mandate" when the government of the day ratified Lisbon without a manifesto despite their manifesto pledging the opposite?AlastairMeeks said:
There is not the slightest plausible evidence that the government is seeking a deal. Far from it: it is trashing the only deal that is currently available and making no steps to identify an alternative one.algarkirk said:
It may be there is no specific mandate for no deal, and other things too, but in this world there are politically inevitable things, and operations of law. There are also ways to negotiate, and the government is taking the only way in the circumstances to try to get a deal given that the commons has rejected the first route. If that leads to no deal then a lot of MPs will have some soul searching to do, (though they won't).AlastairMeeks said:
The way in which the referendum was fought is integral to what is politically permissible. Technically, the referendum was advisory only. In reality, ignoring it was a non-starter. Rightly, the government sought to implement the referendum and to do so in accordance with the way it was fought.david_herdson said:
Referendums don't given mandates to specific policies, not least because the people campaigning for them are not necessarily the ones implementing them.AlastairMeeks said:
There was a prospectus for the referendum, that prospectus has now been abandoned by its proponents. There is no mandate for no deal Brexit. It is completely inconsistent with the mandate sought.Currystardog said:
It is totally wrong, we had a referendum, Brexit won, democracy must be followed. It is Politicians playing silly games that has got us into this position, but whatever, democracy must be followed.
The options on the ballot paper were Remain and Leave, and Leave won. That gives a mandate for everything from EEA+CU+SM+Schengen+etc through to a Drawbridge Brexit. It should be for parliament to sort that one out.
In the same way as claiming that the referendum was advisory only, claiming a mandate for something that was angrily dismissed by proponents throughout the campaign (and for a long time afterwards) because it is technically consistent with the ballot paper is preposterous.
There is no mandate for no deal. And since there is no mandate for no deal, a new mandate is required if the government is to lead the country down that path.
How come the issue about "mandate" only occurs when its an issue that worries you?0 -
Just because we ignore WTO rules doesn't mean the EU will. Heck it is advantageous for them to apply the rules to the latter just to ensure others don't have the same idea.surbiton19 said:
Legally there can be no transition [ officially ] if there is no WA. Otherwise other WTO members could complain. But the UK is going to break WTO rules anyway as the official HMRC document states that trucks will be allowed in from the EU without any checks and shippers will have to lodge both duty and VAT paperwork afterwards [ much like we do today with INTRASTAT which only applies with trade volume and value ]eek said:
How does a transition period work - it's a hard and fast separation to WTO tariffs on the EU's side (because they have to).Big_G_NorthWales said:
Public opinion may not see it that wayeek said:
The EU don't want to be held responsible for it - if we end up with No Deal we own it..Big_G_NorthWales said:I have just driven into Llandudno Town centre and returned via the promenade, over the Little Orme and through Penryhn Bay to Rhos on Sea promenade, continuing on to Colwyn Bay and Old Colwyn's promenades before joining the A55 to return my grandson home having completed our grandparent duties for today.
The whole area is teaming with people on holiday or day trips, the beaches are being enjoyed by many, children building sand castles, dogs running free, sailing boats and surf board abound and why not, with the pound where it is, this is a huge boost to our local economy and everyone, and I mean everyone, is welcome here
My granddaughter who is working at a local attraction before joining the sixth form in a fortnight has been rushed off her feet and with bank holiday weekend looming
Why does anyone need to suffer adverse currency rates when we have so much to enjoy here in the UK
And on David's piece Corbyn is not to be trusted, he is anti the west and pro those who would do us harm, and his magic money tree would deforest most of the UK, just when we need to plant millions of trees. If Corbyn is the answer we are asking the wrong question
I expect MP's to continue to try parliamentary means to stop no deal and cannot see the Lib Dems, or other independents, or more than a handful of conservatives giving Corbyn the keys to no 10 at just the time when the Lib Dems are enjoying a substantial surge in support.
I do expect that in the last few days with no deal actually happening, the EU will offer a 6 month transition no matter that we have not requested it
I could be wrong but I doubt even the EU want the disaster of a 31st October no deal
A lot depends on the mood music over the next few weeks
However, I still expect a transition period on a no deal0
