politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Boris backs Brexit but will it have an impact if he’s not g

another_richard said:

foxinsoxuk said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

chestnut said:

another_richard said:

More like a £66 billion UK deficit on goods and services with the EU during the last year:

The extent of Cameron's failure is in that number.

They make a £66bn profit out of us - we are a fantastic customer - and still they won't meet our needs.

Put the money on the line.

It will be even more than that:

£66bn trade & services deficit + UK tourism deficit with EU + UK net contribution to EU

Its probably approaching £100bn per year. And growing.

All the data for the balance of payments that you are referring to is released each October 30th as The Pink Book by the ONS.

The last one covering 2014 shows we have a current account deficit with the rest of the EU for the year of £107 billion

Indeed we do, it has steadily increased from only £3bn in 2001:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=L87C&dataset=pb&table-id=9.2

Thanks for the info.

From 2001, co-inciding with the start of the Euro.

And in 2001 UK government debt stood at £329 by 2015 it was £1606bn:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=HF6W&dataset=pusf&table-id=PSA1

Now I wonder where much of that borrowed money flowed to.

The austerity of the EZ has been harsh in many ways, but it has been much better for exporters than our own "march of the makers".

foxinsoxuk said:

Philip_Thompson said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Philip_Thompson said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Fenster said:

mwjfrome17 said:

As for IDS saying that staying in EU would leave us more vulnerable to 'Paris style attacks' is beneath contempt. Just an old fashioned Enoch Powell style piece of claptrap.

IDS married Elizabeth "Betsy" Fremantle, daughter of the 5th Baron Cottesloe, in 1982. The couple have four children, and live in a country house belonging to his father-in-law's estate in Swanbourne, Buckinghamshire.

Obviously some tough life choices there.

I dont mind that he does not have a high level of academic achievement as I don't either. I don't lie abut mine.

According to the BBC, Duncan Smith's biography on the Conservative Party website and his entry in Who's Who originally stated that he had studied at the University of Perugia in Italy. A BBC investigation in 2002 found this statement to be untrue.[7] In response to the BBC story, Duncan Smith's office stated that he had in fact attended the Università per Stranieri, a different institution in Perugia, for a year.[7] He did not complete his course of study, sit exams, or gain any qualifications there. Duncan Smith's biography, on the Conservative Party website, also stated that he was "educated at Dunchurch College of Management" but his office later confirmed that he did not gain any qualifications there either, that he completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to about a month in total.[7] Dunchurch was the former staff college for GEC Marconi, for whom Duncan Smith worked in the 1980s.[7]

PS I hate IDS and all he stands for.

The horrible bastard has dedicated a decade of his life trying to transform the lives of people living in generational poverty, when any fool knows giving them handouts and no prospect of a job is a better answer.

Universal Credit does rather seem like the Chillcott report or TSE's legendary magnum opus. Waiting for Godot.

Except UC has already started.

Years late and way over budget. At the current rate it will be 495 years before it is universal!

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/25/labour-says-universal-credit-will-take-495-years-to-roll-out-as-costs-rise-3bn

Try a report that isn't incredibly dodgy based on a Labour press release with their ludicrous spin and that isn't nearly a year out of date.

I actually quite like the idea of UC. But it shows that IDS is pretty incompetent at implementation, amongst many other flaws.

Or that rather than sticking to artificial deadlines and cause long term havoc IDS would prefer to take the time to make sure implementation is done right.

mwjfrome17 said:

Fenster said:

Sorry, are you serious. Really. A decade of his life. As far as I know he'd been an MP, a shadow minister, Leader of the Opposition (the quiet man) and then Cabinet minister. Selfless. Even though he was once party leader he is most famous for shafting his then Prime Minister over Maastricht. And who was responsible for this generational poverty. Closing the mines, the steel plants, the ship building capacity overnight and replacing with the odd call centre. Who was that. His heroine. Selling off council housing. How did that work our for social mobility? The drug and alcohol problems that followed on. Do you ever wonder what the costs have been of these policies rather than the perceived costs of having communities in work. No. You don't.

LOL. I live in one of those communities.

I know lots of people who chose not to work because they were better off on benefits - a lot of those people are now in work. I know everything in life is Thatcher's fault, including Wales's failure to beat a depleted Ireland side on the 6 Nations opener, but living in a mining village I can tell that paying people to be better off not working is not the answer.


Sorry I didn't realise you lived in one of those ex-mining villages that were full of jobs. My bad.

You're obviously a bit dopey and I need to have my bitty before bed, but all I'm saying is this:

Pit closures cost jobs, and we suffered. Of course we did, I had family who worked for the NCB. But economies and circumstances change.

Gordon Brown (and I have no doubt he embarked on it with good intentions) decided the way to deal with generational poverty was to design a convoluted benefit system which eventually deterred people from working.

IDS (and lots of other people) saw the system had become counter-productive abs set out to tackle it. He may not have entirely succeeded but for someone who was an abject leader and who could've slunk away from politics in humiliation, I at least give him credit for trying to tackle a complex issue.

By the way. I love where I live and wouldn't move. I'm in London tomorrow morning. The thought of living there would make me physicallu sick.

mwjfrome17 said:

As for IDS saying that staying in EU would leave us more vulnerable to 'Paris style attacks' is beneath contempt. Just an old fashioned Enoch Powell style piece of claptrap.

IDS married Elizabeth "Betsy" Fremantle, daughter of the 5th Baron Cottesloe, in 1982. The couple have four children, and live in a country house belonging to his father-in-law's estate in Swanbourne, Buckinghamshire.

Obviously some tough life choices there.

I dont mind that he does not have a high level of academic achievement as I don't either. I don't lie abut mine.

According to the BBC, Duncan Smith's biography on the Conservative Party website and his entry in Who's Who originally stated that he had studied at the University of Perugia in Italy. A BBC investigation in 2002 found this statement to be untrue.[7] In response to the BBC story, Duncan Smith's office stated that he had in fact attended the Università per Stranieri, a different institution in Perugia, for a year.[7] He did not complete his course of study, sit exams, or gain any qualifications there. Duncan Smith's biography, on the Conservative Party website, also stated that he was "educated at Dunchurch College of Management" but his office later confirmed that he did not gain any qualifications there either, that he completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to about a month in total.[7] Dunchurch was the former staff college for GEC Marconi, for whom Duncan Smith worked in the 1980s.[7]

PS I hate IDS and all he stands for.

You sound odious.

Fenster said:

malcolmg said:

Fenster said:

mwjfrome17 said:

As for IDS saying that staying in EU would leave us more vulnerable to 'Paris style attacks' is beneath contempt. Just an old fashioned Enoch Powell style piece of claptrap.

IDS married Elizabeth "Betsy" Fremantle, daughter of the 5th Baron Cottesloe, in 1982. The couple have four children, and live in a country house belonging to his father-in-law's estate in Swanbourne, Buckinghamshire.

Obviously some tough life choices there.

I dont mind that he does not have a high level of academic achievement as I don't either. I don't lie abut mine.

According to the BBC, Duncan Smith's biography on the Conservative Party website and his entry in Who's Who originally stated that he had studied at the University of Perugia in Italy. A BBC investigation in 2002 found this statement to be untrue.[7] In response to the BBC story, Duncan Smith's office stated that he had in fact attended the Università per Stranieri, a different institution in Perugia, for a year.[7] He did not complete his course of study, sit exams, or gain any qualifications there. Duncan Smith's biography, on the Conservative Party website, also stated that he was "educated at Dunchurch College of Management" but his office later confirmed that he did not gain any qualifications there either, that he completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to about a month in total.[7] Dunchurch was the former staff college for GEC Marconi, for whom Duncan Smith worked in the 1980s.[7]

PS I hate IDS and all he stands for.

The horrible bastard has dedicated a decade of his life trying to transform the lives of people living in generational poverty, when any fool knows giving them handouts and no prospect of a job is a better answer.

Cuckoo

You'd know all about generational poverty in Scotland.

I've been to Glasgow..fuck me, my area is like the Bellagio in comparison.

Yes I know Glasgow has very poor areas but I also know that nothing IDS has done has helped that.
If they made even a fraction of the effort they spend chasing people on benefits on tax dodgers they would no worries. Chasing those at the bottom in isolation is not devotion.

PS many areas of Glasgow are extremely rich as well.

nigel4england said:

Philip_Thompson said:

nigel4england said:

Philip_Thompson said:

nigel4england said:

To begin with the French are just one out of 26, however if they do want to impose a trade tariff then fine, there will be a reciprocal arrangement. We would be forced into protectionism of their making, no bad thing. We cannot lose given the trade deficit.

Fancy a game of poker?

We can lose as you are proposing a game of Russian Roulette not Poker. The fact that protectionism would hurt them does not mean it won't hurt us too. Plus since the French and others have shown themselves to not be economically rational it is naive to assume they won't do the wrong thing.

Explain to me what we lose?

Free trade. We lose on exports that we lose due to their Tariffs, we lose on imports that are made more expensive by our own Tariffs. Lose, lose.

So Algeria, Albania, Chile, South Korea and loads more have free trade agreements with the EU but we would be denied one?

Get real and stop the only tactic Remainers have, scaremongering

I'm not scaremongering. I'm saying that while you are probably right I don't trust the French and so we can't guarantee it. In an ideal world you'd be right, but then in an ideal world the EU would be lot better anyway.

Scott_P said:

"No means yes", Boris Johnson...

I look forward to Nige and Gorgeous George explaining that one for the next 4 months.

Yes if we vote to LEAVE it will be a disaster for LEAVE

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

The most popular politician in the country campaigns for Brexit... What a disaster say the in spin

Will he be campaigning? We know he won't be debating. Interviews look like they'll be off limits too. The odd column, some jolly photos, the odd speech ... Others will be doing the heavy lifting. And Boris has raised all kinds of questions about what a Leave vote actually means.

So say the headlines

And as he is the most popular politician in the country, that will probably be enough for the overwhelming number of people who aren't really interested in politics

You only have to see how many times Scott P has tried to make it seem bad news for Leave to know its a major plus for them

He is the most popular politician in the country because he carefully avoided doing anything political. Now he has: he sort of, kind of wants to leave the EU, but maybe not if things change. Let's see how popular that makes him.

Fenster said:

mwjfrome17 said:

Fenster said:

Sorry, are you serious. Really. A decade of his life. As far as I know he'd been an MP, a shadow minister, Leader of the Opposition (the quiet man) and then Cabinet minister. Selfless. Even though he was once party leader he is most famous for shafting his then Prime Minister over Maastricht. And who was responsible for this generational poverty. Closing the mines, the steel plants, the ship building capacity overnight and replacing with the odd call centre. Who was that. His heroine. Selling off council housing. How did that work our for social mobility? The drug and alcohol problems that followed on. Do you ever wonder what the costs have been of these policies rather than the perceived costs of having communities in work. No. You don't.

LOL. I live in one of those communities.

I know lots of people who chose not to work because they were better off on benefits - a lot of those people are now in work. I know everything in life is Thatcher's fault, including Wales's failure to beat a depleted Ireland side on the 6 Nations opener, but living in a mining village I can tell that paying people to be better off not working is not the answer.

Sorry I didn't realise you lived in one of those ex-mining villages that were full of jobs. My bad.

You're obviously a bit dopey and I need to have my bitty before bed, but all I'm saying is this:

Pit closures cost jobs, and we suffered. Of course we did, I had family who worked for the NCB. But economies and circumstances change.

Gordon Brown (and I have no doubt he embarked on it with good intentions) decided the way to deal with generational poverty was to design a convoluted benefit system which eventually deterred people from working.

IDS (and lots of other people) saw the system had become counter-productive abs set out to tackle it. He may not have entirely succeeded but for someone who was an abject leader and who could've slunk away from politics in humiliation, I at least give him credit for trying to tackle a complex issue.

By the way. I love where I live and wouldn't move. I'm in London tomorrow morning. The thought of living there would make me physicallu sick.

Why..its just a series of villages connected by the underground. I'm from Aberystwyth and my family still live there. Thats much scarier on a Friday night believe me.

Richard_Tyndall said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Philip_Thompson said:

On a technical basis are we listed as an EEA member in our own rights and not as part of the EU?

No, we are signatories in our capacity as EU members. The EEA agreement is basically an agreement between the three EEA countries and the EU. We'd have to agree a new treaty with the 30 other countries to join as EEA members.

Not so. We are signatories independently of our membership of the EU. Each state is a separate signatory and the EU itself signed separately as well.

Yes, but we are signatories in our capacity as EU members.

For example:

- See pages 4 and 5: list of contracting parties. It's no coincidence that the AND separates EU states from the EFTA states

- .. because (see Article 2 page 7);

the term "EFTA States" means the Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway;

Obviously, we wouldn't automatically become an 'EFTA state' on leaving the EU, this treaty would have to be amended to include us as such.

http://www.efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf

nigel4england said:

To begin with the French are just one out of 26, however if they do want to impose a trade tariff then fine, there will be a reciprocal arrangement. We would be forced into protectionism of their making, no bad thing. We cannot lose given the trade deficit.

Fancy a game of poker?

If I remember correctly, there was a survey of US people during the peak of US-Japan competition in the 90's. The survey asked if they would be OK with Japanese GDP falling by 10%, if the cost was US GDP falling by 5%. A majority said yes.

Which is insane.

Trade wars are like nuclear wars: nobody wins. If country X imposes tariffs on our goods, then it makes hem more expensive and fewer are bought, causing unemployment in our country. If we in turn impose tariffs on their goods in revenge, that makes their goods more expensive, forcing us to choose inferior goods as replacement. This is not a victory for either side. The "game of poker" you envisage is the equivalent of you cutting off your own foot, cutting off two of county X's feet, and calling it a victory. It isn't.

malcolmg said:

Fenster said:

malcolmg said:

Fenster said:

mwjfrome17 said:

As for IDS saying that staying in EU would leave us more vulnerable to 'Paris style attacks' is beneath contempt. Just an old fashioned Enoch Powell style piece of claptrap.

IDS married Elizabeth "Betsy" Fremantle, daughter of the 5th Baron Cottesloe, in 1982. The couple have four children, and live in a country house belonging to his father-in-law's estate in Swanbourne, Buckinghamshire.

Obviously some tough life choices there.

I dont mind that he does not have a high level of academic achievement as I don't either. I don't lie abut mine.

According to the BBC, Duncan Smith's biography on the Conservative Party website and his entry in Who's Who originally stated that he had studied at the University of Perugia in Italy. A BBC investigation in 2002 found this statement to be untrue.[7] In response to the BBC story, Duncan Smith's office stated that he had in fact attended the Università per Stranieri, a different institution in Perugia, for a year.[7] He did not complete his course of study, sit exams, or gain any qualifications there. Duncan Smith's biography, on the Conservative Party website, also stated that he was "educated at Dunchurch College of Management" but his office later confirmed that he did not gain any qualifications there either, that he completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to about a month in total.[7] Dunchurch was the former staff college for GEC Marconi, for whom Duncan Smith worked in the 1980s.[7]

PS I hate IDS and all he stands for.

The horrible bastard has dedicated a decade of his life trying to transform the lives of people living in generational poverty, when any fool knows giving them handouts and no prospect of a job is a better answer.

Cuckoo

You'd know all about generational poverty in Scotland.

I've been to Glasgow..fuck me, my area is like the Bellagio in comparison.

Yes I know Glasgow has very poor areas but I also know that nothing IDS has done has helped that.
If they made even a fraction of the effort they spend chasing people on benefits on tax dodgers they would no worries. Chasing those at the bottom in isolation is not devotion.

PS many areas of Glasgow are extremely rich as well.

No, I agree. We had some nasty experiences over my Dad's Alzheimers with my mother being interrogated to get benefits when my Dad clearly needed 24-hr care. That wasn't pretty.

But areas of Scotland, like round here, we're badly let down by longterm Labour MPS who just took their votes for granted. I applaud the SNP on routing them at GE2015. Sadly, here the alternative is Plaid, and I dont think they are a serious party.

Theuniondivvie said:

An 'interesting' view.

https://twitter.com/maxkeiser/status/701463584434421760

Odd. A mis-speak?

On topic, I notice that Outers are not so scornful now. But I think the valueof the endorsement may have been somewhat undermined by the apparent indecision.

chestnut said:

foxinsoxuk said:

another_richard said:

foxinsoxuk said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

chestnut said:

another_richard said:

More like a £66 billion UK deficit on goods and services with the EU during the last year:

The extent of Cameron's failure is in that number.

They make a £66bn profit out of us - we are a fantastic customer - and still they won't meet our needs.

Put the money on the line.

It will be even more than that:

£66bn trade & services deficit + UK tourism deficit with EU + UK net contribution to EU

Its probably approaching £100bn per year. And growing.

All the data for the balance of payments that you are referring to is released each October 30th as The Pink Book by the ONS.

The last one covering 2014 shows we have a current account deficit with the rest of the EU for the year of £107 billion

Indeed we do, it has steadily increased from only £3bn in 2001:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=L87C&dataset=pb&table-id=9.2

Thanks for the info.

From 2001, co-inciding with the start of the Euro.

And in 2001 UK government debt stood at £329 by 2015 it was £1606bn:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=HF6W&dataset=pusf&table-id=PSA1

Now I wonder where much of that borrowed money flowed to.

The austerity of the EZ has been harsh in many ways, but it has been much better for exporters than our own "march of the makers".

People are very keen to draw attention to US companies' profits which are taxed elsewhere, but what happens with the 700,000 cars the Germans sell here?

How much tax do they pay? Also, unlike Starbucks etc - how many of the German car manufacturers' jobs are based here?

Is tax campaigning essentially anti-American, but blind-eyed with the EU?

Amazon legally dodge tax by basing their operations in Luxembourg and taking advantage of EU rules.

It seems to be all about civil war in the Tory Party. I'm not at all sure that Boris has brought anything other than cynicism to the leave campaign. Tories trade unionists Labour Scots Nats Lib Dems are all joining forces to ridicule the self seeking Leavers in the Tory Party

@iainmartin1: Only a complete loon would think that after Brexit there wouldn't be several years of talks and establishment of a new relationship.

Wanderer said:

Mortimer said:

SMukesh said:

Tories at war...what not to like...

Tories at war still beat Corbyn.

1) Maybe
2) Corbyn isn't immortal (politically or otherwise)

I'm constantly staggered by how little credence many people on here give to Corbo's poor ratings. And even more so by the comfort they seek by the idea that he won't be around forever.

In the meantime, the Labour party is dying, and, after the boundaries are evened up, the path to No. 10 for anyone other than Cons is simply too difficult.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Philip_Thompson said:

On a technical basis are we listed as an EEA member in our own rights and not as part of the EU?

No, we are signatories in our capacity as EU members. The EEA agreement is basically an agreement between the three EEA countries and the EU. We'd have to agree a new treaty with the 30 other countries to join as EEA members.

Not so. We are signatories independently of our membership of the EU. Each state is a separate signatory and the EU itself signed separately as well.

Yes, but we are signatories in our capacity as EU members.

For example:

- See pages 4 and 5: list of contracting parties. It's no coincidence that the AND separates EU states from the EFTA states

- .. because (see Article 2 page 7);

the term "EFTA States" means the Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway;

Obviously, we wouldn't automatically become an 'EFTA state' on leaving the EU, this treaty would have to be amended to include us as such.

http://www.efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf

And by joining EFTA we would suddenly be 80% of the population and 70% of the economy. It would automatically be a very different organisation.

mwjfrome17 said:

Fenster said:

mwjfrome17 said:

As for IDS saying that staying in EU would leave us more vulnerable to 'Paris style attacks' is beneath contempt. Just an old fashioned Enoch Powell style piece of claptrap.

IDS married Elizabeth "Betsy" Fremantle, daughter of the 5th Baron Cottesloe, in 1982. The couple have four children, and live in a country house belonging to his father-in-law's estate in Swanbourne, Buckinghamshire.

Obviously some tough life choices there.

I dont mind that he does not have a high level of academic achievement as I don't either. I don't lie abut mine.

According to the BBC, Duncan Smith's biography on the Conservative Party website and his entry in Who's Who originally stated that he had studied at the University of Perugia in Italy. A BBC investigation in 2002 found this statement to be untrue.[7] In response to the BBC story, Duncan Smith's office stated that he had in fact attended the Università per Stranieri, a different institution in Perugia, for a year.[7] He did not complete his course of study, sit exams, or gain any qualifications there. Duncan Smith's biography, on the Conservative Party website, also stated that he was "educated at Dunchurch College of Management" but his office later confirmed that he did not gain any qualifications there either, that he completed six separate courses lasting a few days each, adding up to about a month in total.[7] Dunchurch was the former staff college for GEC Marconi, for whom Duncan Smith worked in the 1980s.[7]

PS I hate IDS and all he stands for.

The horrible bastard has dedicated a decade of his life trying to transform the lives of people living in generational poverty, when any fool knows giving them handouts and no prospect of a job is a better answer.

Sorry, are you serious. Really. A decade of his life. As far as I know he'd been an MP, a shadow minister, Leader of the Opposition (the quiet man) and then Cabinet minister. Selfless. Even though he was once party leader he is most famous for shafting his then Prime Minister over Maastricht. And who was responsible for this generational poverty. Closing the mines, the steel plants, the ship building capacity overnight and replacing with the odd call centre. Who was that. His heroine. Selling off council housing. How did that work our for social mobility? The drug and alcohol problems that followed on. Do you ever wonder what the costs have been of these policies rather than the perceived costs of having communities in work. No. You don't.

Mr Wilson closed more mines than Mrs Thatcher.

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Nigel Farage challenges Nicola Sturgeon to EU debate in Scotland: https://t.co/eCuEuDRUWQ https://t.co/ZVVrX0jOry

Poor sod, having to listen to Sturgeon witter on for an hour without being able to a word in edge ways. I, like most people up here, including her supporters, tune her out when she starts up. She never says anything important anyway, her legal training stops her.

Niall Ferguson comes out against Brexit in his ST column today 'Brexit now and we will only have to return to save a disintegrating Europe'
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/article1669873.ece

@JananGanesh: Outers now having to pretend that Boris's line is exactly what they were hoping for.

See isam's posts this evening...

foxinsoxuk said:

Cyclefree said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Cyclefree said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Cyclefree said:

RobD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

surbiton said:

SouthamObserver said:

Alanbrooke said:

SouthamObserver said:

richardDodd said:

Surely a single market requires a single set of rules equally applied?

No. Why should it? You don't have the same VAT rates or the

If you are saying that different rules should be applied in different parts of the market, that is quite distant from a single market. It is of course reasonable to argue that a single market is not a good idea.

No. It's what we have now. I can set up a bookselling business here and sell to French, Italian and German readers and others across the EU. I can do that because of the single market. Whether I choose to start work at 6 am or 10 am is up to me. The level of tax I pay is dependant on where my business is located. The price at which I sell does not have to be the same as every other bookseller in the market. But it is still a single market.

What the EU hierarchy want is not a single market where lots of different entities compete. They want one market where everything is the same, where competition within it is largely eliminated. Hence the talk by the Germans about "unfair" tax competition by the Irish over corporation tax, for instance.

The removal of non-tarriff barriers in services has been one of the longstanding goals of the single market, and these are always contentious. Take animal husbandry rules for bacon for example. Is this a non-tarriff barrier or a legitimate British concern?

Issues relating to services including financial services are similar, and one reason why we should remain where our voice can be heard.

If the EZ can impose its rules over our objections, then how much easier when we are outside the EU?

Yes - that is why this is a very difficult choice. But if the eurozone can impose rules on us over our objections even when we are members, what's the point of membership?

Niall Ferguson comes out against Brexit in his ST column today 'Brexit now and we will only have to return to save a disintegrating Europe'

It's a quaint line, isn't it? Dear Lord Bramall argued much the same recently i.e. we can't leave because those poor Europeans won't know what to do without us.

Personally I think we are all grown up countries now, and we do not have a duty of care for our European neighbours.

runnymede said:

Niall Ferguson comes out against Brexit in his ST column today 'Brexit now and we will only have to return to save a disintegrating Europe'

It's a quaint line, isn't it? Dear Lord Bramall argued much the same recently i.e. we can't leave because those poor Europeans won't know what to do without us.

Personally I think we are all grown up countries now, and we do not have a duty of care for our European neighbours.

Similarly patronising line in the Guardian - titled something like 'how to argue with a Brexiter - and win'. Vacuous arguments like 'what about the Irish' - we're their biggest market'.

Two comments on the article by Boris:

1) It's uncharacteristically turgid.

2) It reads like an article written by a commentator, not a potential leader.

Mortimer said:

Wanderer said:

Mortimer said:

SMukesh said:

Tories at war...what not to like...

Tories at war still beat Corbyn.

1) Maybe
2) Corbyn isn't immortal (politically or otherwise)

I'm constantly staggered by how little credence many people on here give to Corbo's poor ratings. And even more so by the comfort they seek by the idea that he won't be around forever.

In the meantime, the Labour party is dying, and, after the boundaries are evened up, the path to No. 10 for anyone other than Cons is simply too difficult.

God, such complacency.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Two comments on Richard Nabavi's posts:

1) They are uncharacteristically turgid.

2) They read like articles written by a commentator, not a potential leader.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Two comments on the article by Boris:

1) It's uncharacteristically turgid.

2) It reads like an article written by a commentator, not a potential leader.

Do you think? I enjoy BoJo's sentiments but don't often finish his posts (either on fb or in newspapers) because they go on a bit. Turgid is pretty usual for him...

I agree with you on the second comment - but then so did Cameron's articles published in various papers when in opposition; Miliband's too. Newspaper articles sound like they were written by a journalist shocker!

Ignore the frightened Europhiles. They are just trying to disarm what they see as their greatest threat.

correct

Richard_Nabavi said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Philip_Thompson said:

On a technical basis are we listed as an EEA member in our own rights and not as part of the EU?

No, we are signatories in our capacity as EU members. The EEA agreement is basically an agreement between the three EEA countries and the EU. We'd have to agree a new treaty with the 30 other countries to join as EEA members.

Not so. We are signatories independently of our membership of the EU. Each state is a separate signatory and the EU itself signed separately as well.

Yes, but we are signatories in our capacity as EU members.

For example:

- See pages 4 and 5: list of contracting parties. It's no coincidence that the AND separates EU states from the EFTA states

- .. because (see Article 2 page 7);

the term "EFTA States" means the Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Kingdom of Norway;

Obviously, we wouldn't automatically become an 'EFTA state' on leaving the EU, this treaty would have to be amended to include us as such.

http://www.efta.int/media/documents/legal-texts/eea/the-eea-agreement/Main Text of the Agreement/EEAagreement.pdf

Sorry Richard but on this you are wrong.

Since we signed in our own right our position in the treaty is governed by the 1969 Vienna Convention on Treaties. This means that irrespective of whatever other treaties we might withdraw from, as long as we do not choose to withdraw from the EEA traty we are still members. The requirement under the EEA treaty is that we either members of the EU or EFTA. If we leave one but do not join the other then we are in breach of our treaty obligations but as long as we transfer from the EU to EFTA we remain part of the EEA.

If the EU had signed on our behalf - bearing in mind they did sign in their own right - and we had not signed ourselves then you would have been correct. As it is we remain members of the EEA as long as we are in either the EU or EFTA.

MarqueeMark said:

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

one Johnson ally says, the PM has offered Boris Johnson every job in government except Chancellor -
See more at: http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/boris-johnson-joins-leave-campaign/32458#sthash.oUhf4n6x.dpuf

Well that's going to make the Cabinet a happy house.... "What do you mean, he got offered MY job?"

Indeed. Fun times ahead for us all.

A note of caution about the Nevada GOP Caucus, this is how they will count the result:

https://twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/701420194300882945

As you see there is plenty of things that can go wrong, if Trump didn't had a large lead in the polls I would be worried.

@Richard_Tyndall">No, I'm not wrong.

Consider article 40:

Within the framework of the provisions of this Agreement, there shall be no restrictions between the Contracting Parties on the movement of capital belonging to persons resident in EC Member States or EFTA State

The three EFTA states are defined on page 7. How on earth would the treaty suddenly rewrite itself so that we spontaneously moved from one category to the other?

Obviously, therefore, we'd need to negotiate a variant of the treaty, or a new treaty, with the 30 other signatories. We couldn't simply pop up and say 'Hi, We're an EFTA state now'

Speedy said:

A note of caution about the Nevada GOP Caucus, this is how they will count the result:

As you see there is plenty of things that can go wrong, if Trump didn't had a large lead in the polls I would be worried.

Iowa had to resort to coin tosses. I would hope the home of gambling has a more entertaining way to decide dead heats...

Scott_P said:

@JananGanesh: This is even more clearly "Vote Out to stay In" than the column. https://t.co/dbcmgH44Yp

Utterly moronic. That would only be true if the only way to have a deal is to be In. If I say the Swiss have a better deal does that make them In?

SouthamObserver said:

Will he be campaigning? We know he won't be debating. Interviews look like they'll be off limits too. The odd column, some jolly photos, the odd speech ... Others will be doing the heavy lifting. And Boris has raised all kinds of questions about what a Leave vote actually means.

Nobody knows what a LEAVE vote means, agreed, Mr Observer. And nobody has the least idea what a REMAIN vote means either.

The whole thing is a waste of time. Its only purpose was and is to prevent the Tory Party from splitting. I think the Tories ought to foot the bill. How much is it costing us taxpayers?

Cyclefree said:

Scott_P said:

@steverichards14: Boris Tel column shows he is not for 'out'. Instead he argues the rest of the EU will 'listen' if UK votes 'out'.. An unconvincing Third Way

The most prominent outer, is not an outer...

Is Cameron the luckiest PM in history?

No - he's showing up Cameron's useless deal by saying that he would have been for In had Cameron done a better job. He's not the only one who thinks that.

And the EU has form for making countries vote again if they give the "wrong" answer. The EU is pretty quick about reversing gear when it suits them, whatever they may have said beforehand.

As for the EMU rule book changes, these are - in effect - a disguised attempt to squeeze us into the euro in time. Once we're subject to all the rules, the arguments against going the whole way will become harder and harder to resist. A vote for Remain will inevitably mean a vote for full political and economic integration. We are being salami sliced into it.

The EU cannot make the UK vote again. In the event of an Out, the UK would invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Suggesting anything else is disingenuous at best.

foxinsoxuk said:

chestnut said:

foxinsoxuk said:

another_richard said:

foxinsoxuk said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

another_richard said:

chestnut said:

another_richard said:

More like a £66 billion UK deficit on goods and services with the EU during the last year:

The extent of Cameron's failure is in that number.

They make a £66bn profit out of us - we are a fantastic customer - and still they won't meet our needs.

Put the money on the line.

It will be even more than that:

£66bn trade & services deficit + UK tourism deficit with EU + UK net contribution to EU

Its probably approaching £100bn per year. And growing.

All the data for the balance of payments that you are referring to is released each October 30th as The Pink Book by the ONS.

The last one covering 2014 shows we have a current account deficit with the rest of the EU for the year of £107 billion

Indeed we do, it has steadily increased from only £3bn in 2001:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=L87C&dataset=pb&table-id=9.2

Thanks for the info.

From 2001, co-inciding with the start of the Euro.

And in 2001 UK government debt stood at £329 by 2015 it was £1606bn:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=HF6W&dataset=pusf&table-id=PSA1

Now I wonder where much of that borrowed money flowed to.

The austerity of the EZ has been harsh in many ways, but it has been much better for exporters than our own "march of the makers".

People are very keen to draw attention to US companies' profits which are taxed elsewhere, but what happens with the 700,000 cars the Germans sell here?

How much tax do they pay? Also, unlike Starbucks etc - how many of the German car manufacturers' jobs are based here?

Is tax campaigning essentially anti-American, but blind-eyed with the EU?

Amazon legally dodge tax by basing their operations in Luxembourg and taking advantage of EU rules.

Another excellent reason to leave the EU.

Philip_Thompson said:

nigel4england said:

Philip_Thompson said:

nigel4england said:

Philip_Thompson said:

nigel4england said:

Philip_Thompson said:

nigel4england said:

To begin with the French are just one out of 26, however if they do want to impose a trade tariff then fine, there will be a reciprocal arrangement. We would be forced into protectionism of their making, no bad thing. We cannot lose given the trade deficit.

Fancy a game of poker?

We can lose as you are proposing a game of Russian Roulette not Poker. The fact that protectionism would hurt them does not mean it won't hurt us too. Plus since the French and others have shown themselves to not be economically rational it is naive to assume they won't do the wrong thing.

Explain to me what we lose?

Free trade. We lose on exports that we lose due to their Tariffs, we lose on imports that are made more expensive by our own Tariffs. Lose, lose.

So Algeria, Albania, Chile, South Korea and loads more have free trade agreements with the EU but we would be denied one?

Get real and stop the only tactic Remainers have, scaremongering

I'm not scaremongering. I'm saying that while you are probably right I don't trust the French and so we can't guarantee it. In an ideal world you'd be right, but then in an ideal world the EU would be lot better anyway.

I don't trust anyone, least of all our own politicians, but at least I get the chance to vote them out.

Thanks for the debate though, genuinely enjoyed it.

We do. We don't get to vote out a French government that starts a trade war with us though. Glad you enjoyed it.

If we join EFTA they can't start a trade war.

One-sixth of people who were born in Ireland now live outside the country. It's over 25% for those in their 20s. The female population aged between 20 and 24 has decreased by 34% since 2009.

PClipp said:

SouthamObserver said:

Will he be campaigning? We know he won't be debating. Interviews look like they'll be off limits too. The odd column, some jolly photos, the odd speech ... Others will be doing the heavy lifting. And Boris has raised all kinds of questions about what a Leave vote actually means.

Nobody knows what a LEAVE vote means, agreed, Mr Observer. And nobody has the least idea what a REMAIN vote means either.

The whole thing is a waste of time. Its only purpose was and is to prevent the Tory Party from splitting. I think the Tories ought to foot the bill. How much is it costing us taxpayers?

Maybe if it hadn't been a manifesto commitment that a majority of Parliament was elected on.

PClipp said:

SouthamObserver said:

Will he be campaigning? We know he won't be debating. Interviews look like they'll be off limits too. The odd column, some jolly photos, the odd speech ... Others will be doing the heavy lifting. And Boris has raised all kinds of questions about what a Leave vote actually means.

Nobody knows what a LEAVE vote means, agreed, Mr Observer. And nobody has the least idea what a REMAIN vote means either.

The whole thing is a waste of time. Its only purpose was and is to prevent the Tory Party from splitting. I think the Tories ought to foot the bill. How much is it costing us taxpayers?

Whatever it's purpose, settling the issue would seem to be an endeavour worthy of its cost. Given how it is predicted to be close, it may be Tories most riled up by the issue but it is not an issue of concern only to them, so suggesting they should foot the bill is simply absurd, even if we accepted the proposition people should only have to foot the bill for things they are interested in.

Mortimer said:

Wanderer said:

Mortimer said:

Wanderer said:

Mortimer said:

SMukesh said:

Tories at war...what not to like...

Tories at war still beat Corbyn.

1) Maybe
2) Corbyn isn't immortal (politically or otherwise)

I'm constantly staggered by how little credence many people on here give to Corbo's poor ratings. And even more so by the comfort they seek by the idea that he won't be around forever.

In the meantime, the Labour party is dying, and, after the boundaries are evened up, the path to No. 10 for anyone other than Cons is simply too difficult.

God, such complacency.

Reality often looks like complacency when it is not what you want to hear...

There's literally nothing I have ever wanted less, politically, than a Corbyn government. I joined the Conservative Party specifically to help prevent it. But I see that Conservative members such as yourself don't take the danger seriously. To be clear it's very unlikely but it's not impossible and in my view would be catastrophic.

As to Corbyn resigning or being replaced, that could happen at any time.

Also, whatever else its problems, Labour isn't dying. It has a large, young membership in stark contrast with the Conservatives.

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

The most popular politician in the country campaigns for Brexit... What a disaster say the in spin

Will he be campaigning? We know he won't be debating. Interviews look like they'll be off limits too. The odd column, some jolly photos, the odd speech ... Others will be doing the heavy lifting. And Boris has raised all kinds of questions about what a Leave vote actually means.

So say the headlines

And as he is the most popular politician in the country, that will probably be enough for the overwhelming number of people who aren't really interested in politics

You only have to see how many times Scott P has tried to make it seem bad news for Leave to know its a major plus for them

He is the most popular politician in the country because he carefully avoided doing anything political. Now he has: he sort of, kind of wants to leave the EU, but maybe not if things change. Let's see how popular that makes him.

It's good news for people who want out of the EU that he has done what he has done today, it's as simple as that

Obviously Boris supporting Leave is excellent news for them. It requires very tortured thinking to claim otherwise. The news cycle is dominated by the fact that the country's most popular politician supports Leave, not the minutiae of his article.