politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The change in the parliamentary arithmetic since he became PM

The is probably a fifth horseman of the apocalypse called something like "Inane Auto-destruct".

swing_voter said:

One of BJ's errors was to ditch the likes of Hammond, Stewart and even Toby Ellwood, it was made clear that their views were not welcome. Whilst loyalty is an enduring feature in the Tories (with the exception of the CUK 3) it does go both ways and Johnson may rue losing this very strong wing within the party.

They are the bastards of our day.

They can be loyal from the back benches the same as Major's bastards had to be when Maastricht was made a confidence matter.

OT and apropos of nothing:

https://twitter.com/ne0liberal/status/1166579120085581824

StuartDickson said:

Philip_Thompson said:

swing_voter said:

One of BJ's errors was to ditch the likes of Hammond, Stewart and even Toby Ellwood, it was made clear that their views were not welcome. Whilst loyalty is an enduring feature in the Tories (with the exception of the CUK 3) it does go both ways and Johnson may rue losing this very strong wing within the party.

They are the bastards of our day.

They can be loyal from the back benches the same as Major's bastards had to be when Maastricht was made a confidence matter.

John Major led a majority government.

BoZo the Clown doesn’t.

Making collective responsibility more important not less.

Suggestions this morning that Johnson would agree to the deal if the backstop is removed. Pretty sure the backstop's deemed essential by vast majority of RoI opinion, and by all but the DUP in the North.

So does Johnson think the DUP more necessary to his political survival than the Europhiles within the Conservatives?

Lots more arguments here yesterday about what's constitutional in a country with no written constitution. And on telly a bunch of political nobodies signing a big board that is surely the 2019 equivalent of the Ed Stone.

What's constitutional in a long embedded parliamentary democracy such as the UK, is whatever has popular consent. And the mechanism for finding that out is a general election. The rest is noise.

The Ed Stone v.2 crowd, along with Stewart, Hammond and Co might be able to get a 90 days or 180 days extension through with some convention breaking practice. But if there's popular consent to Leave, it shall in the end be so.

The only reason the election isn't happening now is because Tory Remainers and anti-Corbyn Labourites want to indulge in both eating and having cake. Fair enough. Why have a cake if you aren't allowed to eat it.

But my message to such cake scoffers would be to put up or shut up and call a VONC, because all they are doing right now is delaying the inevitability of the decision and extending the period of uncertainty and rancour.

Meanwhile while they play their pointless games, the rest of us can sit back and get excited about the ticking countdown clock, which now stands at only 76 days. I talk of course about the launch of Disney+ and The Mandalorian, starring the irrepressible Pedro Pascal!

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

moonshine said:

Lots more arguments here yesterday about what's constitutional in a country with no written constitution. And on telly a bunch of political nobodies signing a big board that is surely the 2019 equivalent of the Ed Stone.

What's constitutional in a long embedded parliamentary democracy such as the UK, is whatever has popular consent. And the mechanism for finding that out is a general election. The rest is noise.

The Ed Stone v.2 crowd, along with Stewart, Hammond and Co might be able to get a 90 days or 180 days extension through with some convention breaking practice. But if there's popular consent to Leave, it shall in the end be so.

The only reason the election isn't happening now is because Tory Remainers and anti-Corbyn Labourites want to indulge in both eating and having cake. Fair enough. Why have a cake if you aren't allowed to eat it.

But my message to such cake scoffers would be to put up or shut up and call a VONC, because all they are doing right now is delaying the inevitability of the decision and extending the period of uncertainty and rancour.

Meanwhile while they play their pointless games, the rest of us can sit back and get excited about the ticking countdown clock, which now stands at only 76 days. I talk of course about the launch of Disney+ and The Mandalorian, starring the irrepressible Pedro Pascal!

Pointless games? All of those MPs who met yesterday to oppose No Deal are sat on the same side of the negotiating table as the EU. In the biggest negotiation of this country's commercial interests in many, many decades. A negotiation brought about by 17.4m people deciding that is what they wanted.

MarqueeMark said:

moonshine said:

Lots more arguments here yesterday about what's constitutional in a country with no written constitution. And on telly a bunch of political nobodies signing a big board that is surely the 2019 equivalent of the Ed Stone.

What's constitutional in a long embedded parliamentary democracy such as the UK, is whatever has popular consent. And the mechanism for finding that out is a general election. The rest is noise.

The Ed Stone v.2 crowd, along with Stewart, Hammond and Co might be able to get a 90 days or 180 days extension through with some convention breaking practice. But if there's popular consent to Leave, it shall in the end be so.

The only reason the election isn't happening now is because Tory Remainers and anti-Corbyn Labourites want to indulge in both eating and having cake. Fair enough. Why have a cake if you aren't allowed to eat it.

But my message to such cake scoffers would be to put up or shut up and call a VONC, because all they are doing right now is delaying the inevitability of the decision and extending the period of uncertainty and rancour.

Meanwhile while they play their pointless games, the rest of us can sit back and get excited about the ticking countdown clock, which now stands at only 76 days. I talk of course about the launch of Disney+ and The Mandalorian, starring the irrepressible Pedro Pascal!

Pointless games? All of those MPs who met yesterday to oppose No Deal are sat on the same side of the negotiating table as the EU. In the biggest negotiation of this country's commercial interests in many, many decades. A negotiation brought about by 17.4m people deciding that is what they wanted.

I thought the 17.4m wanted 'the easiest Deal in history'. Not to crash out!

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

If all that the Commons can agree on is a further extension, then a further extension it will be. If that helps prompt the death cult into considering what compromises they are prepared to make to secure a majority in the House of Commons, perhaps that would be a start.

Holding a general election is a bit like pulling the handle of a fruit machine. You’d have thought the Conservatives would have learned from 2017 that they can end up with two lemons and a cherry. But perhaps they need a refresher.

Hopefully Boris will be able to come to the Commons with some sort of a revised deal with some sort of a mechanism to replace the backstop but time is incredibly tight and there is no guarantee that this most useless of Parliaments would vote even for that. We need to get back to the compromise of May's deal with the options that gives us to agree the future relationship with the EU during the transition period. The decision of whether that should include permanent SM membership, CU, even free movement are best determined by a GE.

On the arithmetic presuming O'Mara keeps his promise that presumably helps by 1 so Boris is effectively -1 on where May was subject to what the likes of Hammond does.

DavidL said:

On the arithmetic presuming O'Mara keeps his promise that presumably helps by 1 so Boris is effectively -1 on where May was subject to what the likes of Hammond does.

That is a quite a presumption, he isnt the most reliable of sorts from what I gather.

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

If all that the Commons can agree on is a further extension, then a further extension it will be. If that helps prompt the death cult into considering what compromises they are prepared to make to secure a majority in the House of Commons, perhaps that would be a start.

Holding a general election is a bit like pulling the handle of a fruit machine. You’d have thought the Conservatives would have learned from 2017 that they can end up with two lemons and a cherry. But perhaps they need a refresher.

Hopefully Boris will be able to come to the Commons with some sort of a revised deal with some sort of a mechanism to replace the backstop but time is incredibly tight and there is no guarantee that this most useless of Parliaments would vote even for that. We need to get back to the compromise of May's deal with the options that gives us to agree the future relationship with the EU during the transition period. The decision of whether that should include permanent SM membership, CU, even free movement are best determined by a GE.

This Parliament is not particularly useless. It accurately reflects the divisions in the society it represents. Given the epic mistake that Britain made in 2016, there is a lot to be said for allowing a lengthy fermentation process before uncorking the next step.

That sort of self indulgence comes at a heavy price.

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

If all that the Commons can agree on is a further extension, then a further extension it will be. If that helps prompt the death cult into considering what compromises they are prepared to make to secure a majority in the House of Commons, perhaps that would be a start.

Holding a general election is a bit like pulling the handle of a fruit machine. You’d have thought the Conservatives would have learned from 2017 that they can end up with two lemons and a cherry. But perhaps they need a refresher.

Hopefully Boris will be able to come to the Commons with some sort of a revised deal with some sort of a mechanism to replace the backstop but time is incredibly tight and there is no guarantee that this most useless of Parliaments would vote even for that. We need to get back to the compromise of May's deal with the options that gives us to agree the future relationship with the EU during the transition period. The decision of whether that should include permanent SM membership, CU, even free movement are best determined by a GE.

This Parliament is not particularly useless. It accurately reflects the divisions in the society it represents. Given the epic mistake that Britain made in 2016, there is a lot to be said for allowing a lengthy fermentation process before uncorking the next step.

That sort of self indulgence comes at a heavy price.

Brexit is the self-indulgence that is requiring the heavy price. Your current default solution is for the country to crash out of the EU with no agreements in place on an artificial deadline. There must be better options than that.

SouthamObserver said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

No Deal is not an end state and so will not end uncertainty. We need a settled and agreed path to a settled and agreed future. That’s the only way this ends in anything like a positive manner from here.

So how do we get back to May's deal? That's the challenge and its a hard one.

DavidL said:

SouthamObserver said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

No Deal is not an end state and so will not end uncertainty. We need a settled and agreed path to a settled and agreed future. That’s the only way this ends in anything like a positive manner from here.

So how do we get back to May's deal? That's the challenge and its a hard one.

Theresa May’s deal is dead. No flowers, by request.

Whatever solution emerges will have to be on an entirely different basis now. That sea has been rejected on all sides.

MarqueeMark said:

OldKingCole said:

MarqueeMark said:

moonshine said:

Lots more arguments here yesterday about what's constitutional in a country with no written constitution. And on telly a bunch of political nobodies signing a big board that is surely the 2019 equivalent of the Ed Stone.

What's constitutional in a long embedded parliamentary democracy such as the UK, is whatever has popular consent. And the mechanism for finding that out is a general election. The rest is noise.

The Ed Stone v.2 crowd, along with Stewart, Hammond and Co might be able to get a 90 days or 180 days extension through with some convention breaking practice. But if there's popular consent to Leave, it shall in the end be so.

The only reason the election isn't happening now is because Tory Remainers and anti-Corbyn Labourites want to indulge in both eating and having cake. Fair enough. Why have a cake if you aren't allowed to eat it.

But my message to such cake scoffers would be to put up or shut up and call a VONC, because all they are doing right now is delaying the inevitability of the decision and extending the period of uncertainty and rancour.

Meanwhile while they play their pointless games, the rest of us can sit back and get excited about the ticking countdown clock, which now stands at only 76 days. I talk of course about the launch of Disney+ and The Mandalorian, starring the irrepressible Pedro Pascal!

Pointless games? All of those MPs who met yesterday to oppose No Deal are sat on the same side of the negotiating table as the EU. In the biggest negotiation of this country's commercial interests in many, many decades. A negotiation brought about by 17.4m people deciding that is what they wanted.

I thought the 17.4m wanted 'the easiest Deal in history'. Not to crash out!

No Deal IS the easiest deal in history.....

Apparently you're going for the "Most Fatuous Comment By A Brexiteer" award.

Be advised that competition is extremely stiff, even for the hourly version.

Cyclefree said:

Philip_Thompson said:

swing_voter said:

One of BJ's errors was to ditch the likes of Hammond, Stewart and even Toby Ellwood, it was made clear that their views were not welcome. Whilst loyalty is an enduring feature in the Tories (with the exception of the CUK 3) it does go both ways and Johnson may rue losing this very strong wing within the party.

They are the bastards of our day.

They can be loyal from the back benches the same as Major's bastards had to be when Maastricht was made a confidence matter.

Unlike the people you support, they voted repeatedly for the deal so that Parliament would enact the result of the referendum. Rory Stewart, in particular, went out on a limb to try and persuade his fellow MPs to vote in line with the Tory party manifesto, despite his personal preference for Remain.

It is the bastards who are now in government who undermined the government, refused to vote in favour, generally trashed the government's negotiations and behaved in an utterly two-faced and unprincipled way.

And now, having variously sacked, insulted and traduced their various opponents within the party, have the gall to label them disloyal.

solarflare said:

The problem is the opposition + Tory rebels have tactics but no overall strategy.

They're a bit like a tennis player match point down, desperately sending stuff back up the court just in the hope of getting back to deuce. They have no collective vision of what victory looks like.

To torture the metaphor a little more most of them seem resigned to merely keeping the game alive till the tiebreak - an election.

Both sides are good on tactics but have no strategy. What you say is right for opponents of no deal. But it also applies to the No Dealers. Once Britain is out without a deal, what then? No Deal ever with the EU? What if the price of such a deal is precisely what they reject now? What if other countries won't do a deal with Britain until they know what it's long-term relationship with the EU will be? Etc etc.

There has been no strategy at the heart of the parties' offerings for some time now. It's why the country is bouncing around from wall to wall just getting battered and bruised.

Cyclefree said:

solarflare said:

The problem is the opposition + Tory rebels have tactics but no overall strategy.

They're a bit like a tennis player match point down, desperately sending stuff back up the court just in the hope of getting back to deuce. They have no collective vision of what victory looks like.

To torture the metaphor a little more most of them seem resigned to merely keeping the game alive till the tiebreak - an election.

Both sides are good on tactics but have no strategy. What you say is right for opponents of no deal. But it also applies to the No Dealers. Once Britain is out without a deal, what then? No Deal ever with the EU? What if the price of such a deal is precisely what they reject now? What if other countries won't do a deal with Britain until they know what it's long-term relationship with the EU will be? Etc etc.

There has been no strategy at the heart of the parties' offerings for some time now. It's why the country is bouncing around from wall to wall just getting battered and bruised.

More like squash than tennis!

Philip_Thompson said:

StuartDickson said:

Philip_Thompson said:

swing_voter said:

One of BJ's errors was to ditch the likes of Hammond, Stewart and even Toby Ellwood, it was made clear that their views were not welcome. Whilst loyalty is an enduring feature in the Tories (with the exception of the CUK 3) it does go both ways and Johnson may rue losing this very strong wing within the party.

They are the bastards of our day.

They can be loyal from the back benches the same as Major's bastards had to be when Maastricht was made a confidence matter.

John Major led a majority government.

BoZo the Clown doesn’t.

Making collective responsibility more important not less.

Some brave person will wield the knife

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

The Cadbury that was bought by Kraft, a US company? In 2010 under a Labour government? That Cadbury? And the EU's responsibility for that was ......?

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

Bingo! We’ve now reached the point that it’s Remainers’ fault that Leavers voted for Brexit. We’ve reached peak Leaver today.

Double Bingo, Meeks has no answer but diversion.

As it happens, one of my upcoming thread headers is going to look at this subject in some detail. Short summary though: the past problem is less loss of employment (employment grew and continues to grow) and more disruption of communities.

Brexit just accelerates existing trends and makes the problem worse.

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

Bingo! We’ve now reached the point that it’s Remainers’ fault that Leavers voted for Brexit. We’ve reached peak Leaver today.

Double Bingo, Meeks has no answer but diversion.

On the contrary, Mr Meeks (like others) would be OK with us leaving with a Deal (despite preferring to Remain), in line with what the Leavers promised in the referendum and in line with the manifesto on which this government was - just about - elected.

He takes the view - as I and others do - that there is no mandate for Leave on a No Deal basis and that if this is what the Government should do it should get an explicit mandate to do so at a GE and spell out exactly what No Deal means and what happens afterwards i.e. in the weeks, months, years afterwards not just in the first 24 hours. That it should be honest about what it is offering, something the ultra-Leavers have singularly failed to do.

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

The Cadbury that was bought by Kraft, a US company? In 2010 under a Labour government? That Cadbury? And the EU's responsibility for that was ......?

which closed down its HQ, moved its tax base to Zurich and stopped investment in Bristol. and moved all its investment to Poland, yes that one.

The responsibility for that is simply the onewe have had for ages, your industries cant exist withing the EU without a level playing field on workers rights. It means multinationals can close all their UK operations at a fairly low costs and wiith no hassle and transfer the work seamlessly elsewhere. The system practically demands it.

So what would you like instead? An unlevel playing field? Or what?

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

The Cadbury that was bought by Kraft, a US company? In 2010 under a Labour government? That Cadbury? And the EU's responsibility for that was ......?

which closed down its HQ, moved its tax base to Zurich and stopped investment in Bristol. and moved all its investment to Poland, yes that one.

The responsibility for that is simply the onewe have had for ages, your industries cant exist withing the EU without a level playing field on workers rights. It means multinationals can close all their UK operations at a fairly low costs and wiith no hassle and transfer the work seamlessly elsewhere. The system practically demands it.

How does Brexit resolve that issue?

Indeed it sounds as if you are advocating a stronger role for the EU in regulating workers rights and corporate tax.

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

Bingo! We’ve now reached the point that it’s Remainers’ fault that Leavers voted for Brexit. We’ve reached peak Leaver today.

Double Bingo, Meeks has no answer but diversion.

On the contrary, Mr Meeks (like others) would be OK with us leaving with a Deal (despite preferring to Remain), in line with what the Leavers promised in the referendum and in line with the manifesto on which this government was - just about - elected.

He takes the view - as I and others do - that there is no mandate for Leave on a No Deal basis and that if this is what the Government should do it should get an explicit mandate to do so at a GE and spell out exactly what No Deal means and what happens afterwards i.e. in the weeks, months, years afterwards not just in the first 24 hours. That it should be honest about what it is offering, something the ultra-Leavers have singularly failed to do.

One minute youre telling us all theres no strategy ( correct ) next you want to solve it by moving the deck chairs. What are you going to do if we stay in that will make us all better off ?

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

The Cadbury that was bought by Kraft, a US company? In 2010 under a Labour government? That Cadbury? And the EU's responsibility for that was ......?

which closed down its HQ, moved its tax base to Zurich and stopped investment in Bristol. and moved all its investment to Poland, yes that one.

The responsibility for that is simply the onewe have had for ages, your industries cant exist withing the EU without a level playing field on workers rights. It means multinationals can close all their UK operations at a fairly low costs and wiith no hassle and transfer the work seamlessly elsewhere. The system practically demands it.

So what would you like instead? An unlevel playing field? Or what?

Ive been on an unlevel plating field for years, thats the point. Ive had to move UK contracts to continental factories because the board decided its cheaper to sack the brits. It sticks in my craw.

I watched the Parliamentary committe on Bridgend yesterday and the chief weasel from Ford simply summed up again the problem we face.

Easier to hit the brits so lets dump them and their taxpayers cxan pick up the bill.

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

Agreed. Revoking Article 50 would have been a much better idea.

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

The Cadbury that was bought by Kraft, a US company? In 2010 under a Labour government? That Cadbury? And the EU's responsibility for that was ......?

which closed down its HQ, moved its tax base to Zurich and stopped investment in Bristol. and moved all its investment to Poland, yes that one.

The responsibility for that is simply the onewe have had for ages, your industries cant exist withing the EU without a level playing field on workers rights. It means multinationals can close all their UK operations at a fairly low costs and wiith no hassle and transfer the work seamlessly elsewhere. The system practically demands it.

So what would you like instead? An unlevel playing field? Or what?

Ive been on an unlevel plating field for years, thats the point. Ive had to move UK contracts to continental factories because the board decided its cheaper to sack the brits. It sticks in my craw.

I watched the Parliamentary committe on Bridgend yesterday and the chief weasel from Ford simply summed up again the problem we face.

Easier to hit the brits so lets dump them and their taxpayers cxan pick up the bill.

And how does Brexit help with this? What’s the plan?

Cyclefree said:

OldKingCole said:

Cyclefree said:

solarflare said:

The problem is the opposition + Tory rebels have tactics but no overall strategy.

They're a bit like a tennis player match point down, desperately sending stuff back up the court just in the hope of getting back to deuce. They have no collective vision of what victory looks like.

To torture the metaphor a little more most of them seem resigned to merely keeping the game alive till the tiebreak - an election.

Both sides are good on tactics but have no strategy. What you say is right for opponents of no deal. But it also applies to the No Dealers. Once Britain is out without a deal, what then? No Deal ever with the EU? What if the price of such a deal is precisely what they reject now? What if other countries won't do a deal with Britain until they know what it's long-term relationship with the EU will be? Etc etc.

There has been no strategy at the heart of the parties' offerings for some time now. It's why the country is bouncing around from wall to wall just getting battered and bruised.

More like squash than tennis!

Sport not really my thing, as you might have gathered already ......

But you do appear to be acquainted with the Guardian’s cricket correspondent...

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/aug/27/greatest-cricket-test-of-all-headingley-2019-ashes
Being broad-minded, we had an unbeliever to stay the weekend. At some point on Sunday afternoon I yelled out of the window: “You’ve got to come and see this! It’s the most astonishing game!” A languorous, world-weary voice replied from the garden: “Cricket! Always astonishing. Always historic. Always unprecedented.” She never budged...

Currystardog said:

Foxy said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

One of the most damaging things economically is uncertainty. By extending Art 50 with the Cooper Letwin motion Parliament wished another 6 months of uncertainty upon us with adverse economic effects including delayed investment. It really would be a gross dereliction of duty of the Commons to do that again. But they probably will. At that point Boris will seek his election and rightly so. Whether he will get it is another question. Many of the members of this Parliament face unemployment once that election is held. Not enough, regrettably.

There is a huge economic cost, not down to Brexit per se, but the uncertainty around when/what/how we implment it. It is costing economic growth, it is costing jobs. Boris needs to shout very loudly that those losses lie at the door of those Remain MPs continually dicking around with extensions.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

Bingo! We’ve now reached the point that it’s Remainers’ fault that Leavers voted for Brexit. We’ve reached peak Leaver today.

Double Bingo, Meeks has no answer but diversion.

On the contrary, Mr Meeks (like others) would be OK with us leaving with a Deal (despite preferring to Remain), in line with what the Leavers promised in the referendum and in line with the manifesto on which this government was - just about - elected.

He takes the view -

A GE is not likely to solve anything, most likely to wind up in the same mess of a hung parliament.

The only way to resolve the issue is a further referendum. Everything else is continuing paralysis.

So completely ignore the first referendum as the ruling elite have done everything to not respect it??

Not ignoring it, but neither the country nor parliament can agree the way forward. The question would be different this time: Revoke vs No Deal. I am not sure who would win, but it is the only way to move on. A GE is just continuing paralysis.

https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellMP/status/1166595837759295491

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

Bingo! We’ve now reached the point that it’s Remainers’ fault that Leavers voted for Brexit. We’ve reached peak Leaver today.

Double Bingo, Meeks has no answer but diversion.

On the contrary, Mr Meeks (like others) would be OK with us leaving with a Deal (despite preferring to Remain), in line with what the Leavers promised in the referendum and in line with the manifesto on which this government was - just about - elected.

He takes the view - as I and others do - that there is no mandate for Leave on a No Deal basis and that if this is what the Government should do it should get an explicit mandate to do so at a GE and spell out exactly what No Deal means and what happens afterwards i.e. in the weeks, months, years afterwards not just in the first 24 hours. That it should be honest about what it is offering, something the ultra-Leavers have singularly failed to do.

One minute youre telling us all theres no strategy ( correct ) next you want to solve it by moving the deck chairs. What are you going to do if we stay in that will make us all better off ?

I made some suggestions in various thread headers a few years back. I doubt they would now work. So the honest answer now is I don't know. Anything the UK would propose now - if it Remained - would be likely ignored by the others, given the state we're in. But the concerns the UK has are ones shared by other countries so with a bit of goodwill and a lot of thought some changes could be made and quite a lot could be done by the UK government, regardless of the EU, if it had the will. A sensible left of centre government could do a lot more to create an environment here that did not encourage the sort of short-termism you describe.

Nigelb said:

Cyclefree said:

OldKingCole said:

Cyclefree said:

solarflare said:

The problem is the opposition + Tory rebels have tactics but no overall strategy.

They're a bit like a tennis player match point down, desperately sending stuff back up the court just in the hope of getting back to deuce. They have no collective vision of what victory looks like.

To torture the metaphor a little more most of them seem resigned to merely keeping the game alive till the tiebreak - an election.

Both sides are good on tactics but have no strategy. What you say is right for opponents of no deal. But it also applies to the No Dealers. Once Britain is out without a deal, what then? No Deal ever with the EU? What if the price of such a deal is precisely what they reject now? What if other countries won't do a deal with Britain until they know what it's long-term relationship with the EU will be? Etc etc.

There has been no strategy at the heart of the parties' offerings for some time now. It's why the country is bouncing around from wall to wall just getting battered and bruised.

More like squash than tennis!

Sport not really my thing, as you might have gathered already ......

But you do appear to be acquainted with the Guardian’s cricket correspondent...

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/aug/27/greatest-cricket-test-of-all-headingley-2019-ashes
Being broad-minded, we had an unbeliever to stay the weekend. At some point on Sunday afternoon I yelled out of the window: “You’ve got to come and see this! It’s the most astonishing game!” A languorous, world-weary voice replied from the garden: “Cricket! Always astonishing. Always historic. Always unprecedented.” She never budged...

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

Bingo! We’ve now reached the point that it’s Remainers’ fault that Leavers voted for Brexit. We’ve reached peak Leaver today.

Double Bingo, Meeks has no answer but diversion.

As it happens, one of my upcoming thread headersrow) and more disruption of communities.

Brexit just accelerates existing trends and makes the problem worse.

Yes, of course its disruption of communities and the feeling when the major employer has gone that there is no hope. HMG has no policies for these places bar handouts and migrartion. it's hardly a surprise when desperate people move to desperate politicans.

So your solution is what? Because I dons which depend in part on that sector?

As far as I can see, the Brexiteers' response is to throw them a bit of temporary charity in order to keep them off the front pages and then ignore them as per usual while they sign up for a deal allowing mega-US agri-businesses to destroy them completely.

Just like Kraft did when the EU was in charge. Plus ca change, eh......

You may well have a point about the effect of some of the EU's policies. But that does not mean that Brexit - let alone Brexit on the basis on which it is now being offered - is the answer. Dislike of the EU is not enough to come up with a sensible alternative. And yet that seems to be the entire basis of the government's current policy.

The point you fail to register is the threat people like you see to your incomes has been the reality for loads of people outside the prosperity of London and the South East for years.

For these people the choice is the the guaranteed continued disintegration of their communities ( no hope ) versus the chance that things might improve with a shock to the system. Its a perfectly rational choice from where they sit.

Though almost certainly they have voted to disrupt their communities further. The cold winds of globalism will blow much harder with No Deal.

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

.

.

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

The Cadbury that was bought by Kraft, a US company? In 2010 under a Labour government? That Cadbury? And the EU's responsibility for that was ......?

which closed down its HQ, moved its tax base to Zurich and stopped investment in Bristol. and moved all its investment to Poland, yes that one.

The responsibility for that is simply the onewe have had for ages, your industries cant exist withing the EU without a level playing field on workers rights. It means multinationals can close all their UK operations at a fairly low costs and wiith no hassle and transfer the work seamlessly elsewhere. The system practically demands it.

So what would you like instead? An unlevel playing field? Or what?

Ive been on an unlevel plating field for years, thats the point. Ive had to move UK contracts to continental factories because the board decided its cheaper to sack the brits. It sticks in my craw.

I watched the Parliamentary committe on Bridgend yesterday and the chief weasel from Ford simply summed up again the problem we face.

Easier to hit the brits so lets dump them and their taxpayers cxan pick up the bill.

Well done Alan. I'd like Alistair or any other arch Europhile to please explain why they think there has been stagnant real (and nominal!) wage growth in most socioeconomic bands in the UK, despite a very long period of full employment.

Do you think it might have anything to do with the free trade regime of goods/capital/people the UK has had with much lower income countries, as required by three of four of the EU's famous pillars?

Do you think the fourth pillar (free services) is something that primarily helps a) the low skilled in Sunderland, or b) lawyers in London?

I wish for just a day everyone on both sides would just stop and try and understand why half the country voted in the opposite way to them. There are nuanced economic and political driving forces behind this whole thing, this language of cultists is just so one dimensional.

Currystardog said:

To respect the referendum result is the way to move on, why people think it is ok to ignore it is completely beyond me. We must leave.

Would the referendum have been won if Leave had campaigned on a no-deal platform?

Nigelb said:

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

Oh cry me a river. You and the other cultists are completely casual about the job losses and real suffering a disorderly no deal Brexit would cause. But you don’t care about that because of your mad obsession.

werent you casual as the jobs went in Cadbury, Peugeot, Bombardier ? Suck it up you cried. Maybe if youd paid more attention you would have seen how it was changing the political landscape. Brexit was completely avoidable but you cheer led it causes.

Bingo! We’ve now reached the point that it’s Remainers’ fault that Leavers voted for Brexit. We’ve reached peak Leaver today.

Double Bingo, Meeks has no answer but diversion.

As it happens, one of my upcoming thread headersrow) and more disruption of communities.

Brexit just accelerates existing trends and makes the problem worse.

Yes, of course itspoliticans.

So your solution is what? Because I dons which depend in part on that sector?

As far as I can see, the Brexite EU was in charge. Plus ca change, eh......

You may well have a pot policy.

The point you fail to register is the threat people like you see to your incomes has been the reality for loads of people outside the prosperity of London and the South East for years.

For these people the choice is the the guaranteed continued disintegration of their communities ( no hope ) versus the chance that things might improve with a shock to the system. Its a perfectly rational choice from where they sit.

So your answer is that you have no answer, other than kick over all the tables.

And no, that is not rational.

Personally I have lots of things Id llike to see implemented post Brexit but it appears to have escaped your notice that I dont lead any political party so my wishlist is likely to remain just that.

As for rationality it remains as ever the inability of remainers ot understand that what seems rational to them may not be rational to others.

If youve been ignored for years and see no change on the horizon then kicking the tables over and demanding a new start makes sense. The Left has been kicking over tables and for years as a way of getting change on the agenda.

Alanbrooke said:

Cyclefree said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Alanbrooke said:

AlastairMeeks said:

MarqueeMark said:

DavidL said:

You may well have a point about the effect of some of the EU's policies. But that does not mean that Brexit - let alone Brexit on the basis on which it is now being offered - is the answer. Dislike of the EU is not enough to come up with a sensible alternative. And yet that seems to be the entire basis of the government's current policy.

The point you fail to register is the threat people like you see to your incomes has been the reality for loads of people outside the prosperity of London and the South East for years.

For these people the choice is the the guaranteed continued disintegration of their communities ( no hope ) versus the chance that things might improve with a shock to the system. Its a perfectly rational choice from where they sit.

I don't dislike the Brexit we have on offer because of the threat to my income. I dislike it, inter alia, because it threatens the very survival of my daughter's business (employing 4 people at the age of 24 and currently profitable with a hell of a lot of work) in precisely one of those forgotten areas that the Brexiteers claim to be speaking for.

The Brexiteers are using them and will dump them. Of that I have no doubt. The sheep farmers know they are going to be sold down the river by the Brexiteers. The people who are keenest on this hard Brexit are precisely the hedge funders and others in London and the South-East who will take advantage and who then hope to deregulate and remove whatever protections the poor and left-behind still have so that they can create their free market nirvana.

There is a tension between those who voted for Brexit because they hoped for something better (a return to a more stable, protected, guaranteed life, which I sympathise with) - and those who want it because they want to complete an ultra-Thatcherite revolution. That tension has not resolved itself and when it does the results will not be pretty for the disintegrating communities you talk about.

NickPalmer said:

Cyclefree said:

There has been no strategy at the heart of the parties' offerings for some time now. It's why the country is bouncing around from wall to wall just getting battered and bruised.

For what it's worth, Labour has a coherent strategy, which people may not like and which may not prove possible but is intellectually cohesive.

1. Get an election and win it.
2. Scrap May's red lines and negotiate a deal including customs union and not too fussed about free movement - effectively Norway.
3. Offer it to the people in a new referendum as a reasonable option, with Remain as the other reasonable option. Accept either outcome without quibbling. Face down the extremists who want a damaging No Deal or other lunacies.
4. Conduct a socialist government.

And some additional points which matter. Don't flirt with suspending Parliament to get our way. Don't treat opponents as traitors, merely as people we disagree with but will work with as the Parliamentary arithmetic dictates.

Does it mean left-wing policies? Sure. Would it mean a cooler relationship with the US? Under Trump, yes. Might it have all kinds of problems? Undoubtedly. But it's a coherent democratic socialist alternative, and not one that treats Parliament as a suspendible annoyance or obsesses with Brexit while the country rots. It seems to me *obviously* better than what we have now.

So Nick you are in favour of treating everyone who voted to leave as worthless just to get a Labour Government?

NickPalmer said:

Cyclefree said:

There has been no strategy at the heart of the parties' offerings for some time now. It's why the country is bouncing around from wall to wall just getting battered and bruised.

For what it's worth, Labour has a coherent strategy, which people may not like and which may not prove possible but is intellectually cohesive.

1. Get an election and win it.
2. Scrap May's red lines and negotiate a deal including customs union and not too fussed about free movement - effectively Norway.
3. Offer it to the people in a new referendum as a reasonable option, with Remain as the other reasonable option. Accept either outcome without quibbling. Face down the extremists who want a damaging No Deal or other lunacies.
4. Conduct a socialist government.

And some additional points which matter. Don't flirt with suspending Parliament to get our way. Don't treat opponents as traitors, merely as people we disagree with but will work with as the Parliamentary arithmetic dictates.

Does it mean left-wing policies? Sure. Would it mean a cooler relationship with the US? Under Trump, yes. Might it have all kinds of problems? Undoubtedly. But it's a coherent democratic socialist alternative, and not one that treats Parliament as a suspendible annoyance or obsesses with Brexit while the country rots. It seems to me *obviously* better than what we have now.

And it might be quite attractive, Nick, were it not for your leader and his close allies (who do seem to treat internal opponents as traitors, for instance) .......



But I have to get to work now.

So till later all.

To Cyclefree

You generally given the impression that you know something about the world and then you write this. It's now people in London and the South East that are the keenest on a hard Brexit??