If Tory MPs are incapable of behaving then they need to be bypassed. Look to the Lords and beyond for a figure who can lead both the party and the country for 18 months to get us through Brexit. I have a name to float to you who could do that job, is a well-respected statesman and isn't too enmeshed in the current bickering.
Sir John Major.
He's not a Lord.
I know that. How quickly would it take to get him into the Lords? And yes, the party rules almost certainly don't allow for a leader in the Lords. But if the MPs can't remove the dead woman's hands from the tiller and can't decide on who should replace her then they need to have the grandees sort them out.
We've made the mistake of choosing a Remainer once already in May, why make the same mistake twice?
To give a positive Brexit we need someone who actually thinks Brexit is a positive and has a positive vision for how we get there.
That's not May, its not Patten its not Major. It could be Boris or Gove etc
Huzzah for Kazuo and the Nobel committees. When's chemistry due?
It's been and gone. One of the chaps was on The Today Programme this morning. I haven't a clue what it was about (some kind of enhancement on mass spectromatry or something for looking at molecules) but it all seemed jolly clever.
I don't care whether there is suspicion about Ted Heath or not - the man is dead. Plenty of injustices involving people who are still alive to concentrate time/money/people on.
If Tory MPs are incapable of behaving then they need to be bypassed. Look to the Lords and beyond for a figure who can lead both the party and the country for 18 months to get us through Brexit. I have a name to float to you who could do that job, is a well-respected statesman and isn't too enmeshed in the current bickering.
Sir John Major.
He's not a Lord.
Chris Patten, then. Not that old, although he may be weary and not want the job. Certainly a statesman.
Chris Patten ranks alongside Mandleson and Blair for odiousness.
Huzzah for Kazuo and the Nobel committees. When's chemistry due?
It's been and gone. One of the chaps was on The Today Programme this morning. I haven't a clue what it was about (some kind of enhancement on mass spectromatry or something for looking at molecules) but it all seemed jolly clever.
Anyway big picture for a moment. #1 While the referendum result stands until or unless another democratic decision reverses it the ' half life ' of the result proceeds with every passing day. The problem is Brexit is a Zombie. It's animated so must proceed but is dead so has no political momentum. So much of the current angst is to do with Brexit nothing failing politically but still being inevitable. #2 Brexit is not the same as the Leave event. With every passing day the phantasmagoria of the Leave campaign decays into the reality of turgid compromise.
So politics is dominated by something that has to happen but has no independent momentum and won't be what we were promised. It's a formula that will generate more and more static so buckle up.
While Brexit is still overwhelmingly likely to happen ( Zombies can still run toward the finish line ) our more militant Brexiters are right to see the danger. It's why they are becoming increasingly unpleasant on here.
Is there any explanation for Boris's actions over the past few weeks other than utter political incompetence? He seems to have totally destroyed his standing with MPs at the one moment that there could have been a chance to strike
Apologies: I thought I was replying to one of the Jonathans.
Historical facts are one thing. Historians and journalist are not the same as investigators.
Professional investigators - such as the police - need to do their job properly according to the law and not stray into other areas, such as alleviating the victims’ pain. My other point is that once someone is dead guilt or innocence in a court of law is irrelevant. Putting a dead person on trial may be an entertaining way of passing a few days but it is not a sensible use of limited police/legal resources.
Anyway am repeating myself now. One doesn’t want to be a bore. I hope I’ve made my point.
And the hound is looking at me pleadingly..........
Thanks to everyone for this fairly interesting conversation. My tuppence-worth (*):
*) There are problems with over-publicising cases; this is an issue with both the police and the media - the former looking for publicity, and the latter stories. When this happens, neither are primarily interested in justice.
*) The needs of the accuser need to be weighed up with the needs of the accused. Whilst it is important for accusers to be given a fair hearing, the accused should not be treated as automatically guilty, even if they have passed on. I fear the police can see such cases as quite easy 'wins'.
*) It may be important for such cases to be investigated even if the accused has died, and especially if there may have been others involved. As an example, one of Saville's close friends was jailed for multiple crimes against youngsters. ISTR this was a result of the investigation into Saville.
Is there any explanation for Boris's actions over the past few weeks other than utter political incompetence? He seems to have totally destroyed his standing with MPs at the one moment that there could have been a chance to strike
He's putting down a market that he would have been the great leader of the Brexit that never was.
If Tory MPs are incapable of behaving then they need to be bypassed. Look to the Lords and beyond for a figure who can lead both the party and the country for 18 months to get us through Brexit. I have a name to float to you who could do that job, is a well-respected statesman and isn't too enmeshed in the current bickering.
Sir John Major.
He's not a Lord.
Chris Patten, then. Not that old, although he may be weary and not want the job. Certainly a statesman.
Hague?
Equally wouldn't want the job.... And that's the problem who in their right mind would want to deal with the current mess..
I'm beginning to think that Brexit may not happen after all.
If May goes the Tory Party will be consumed by a divisive leadership contest in which candidates will present visions of Brexit which are entirely unrealistic ("no deal is better than a bad deal" on the one hand and a bespoke transitional deal on the other). The side which loses is unlikely to come on board with the one that wins, and in the meantime the A50 clock is ticking, the Brexit negotiations will founder and the DUP could well decide that this is a good moment to abandon what is clearly a sinking ship. So a new Tory leader will emerge without a clear mandate from their own Party, without a parliamentary majority and without a realistic Brexit policy. Whoever it is will have no leverage in negotiations with the EU since it will not be clear that they can deliver the support of either their Party or Parliament for their negotiating position.
The UK will be facing the cliff edge with no effective government. This will be a crisis unparalleled since 1945 and as March 2019 approaches there will be panic in some quarters. Then almost anything could happen and the collapse of the entire Brexit process cannot be ruled out.
Is there any explanation for Boris's actions over the past few weeks other than utter political incompetence? He seems to have totally destroyed his standing with MPs at the one moment that there could have been a chance to strike
I guess his logic is that by setting himself up as the undisputed defender of Brexit, he will win hands down if the vote gets to the euro-sceptic membership.
The flaw seems to be that he has to get the numbers amongst MPs to be one of the names.
Has he got the numbers? Seems unlikely given the public reaction to his efforts this week. Does he know something we don't?
Miss Cyclefree, a dead Pope was put on trial once by his successor (I think the chap on trial [he was found guilty, incidentally] might have been the one who colluded with the French king to bring down the Knights Templar).
Mind you, Xerxes once had the sea lashed as punishment for his bridge of ships being damaged.
And Cromwell was excavated from his grave so that he could be punished by hanging him and sticking his head on a pole.
If Tory MPs are incapable of behaving then they need to be bypassed. Look to the Lords and beyond for a figure who can lead both the party and the country for 18 months to get us through Brexit. I have a name to float to you who could do that job, is a well-respected statesman and isn't too enmeshed in the current bickering.
Sir John Major.
He's not a Lord.
Chris Patten, then. Not that old, although he may be weary and not want the job. Certainly a statesman.
Hague?
Equally wouldn't want the job.... And that's the problem who in their right mind would want to deal with the current mess..
I'm beginning to think that Brexit may not happen after all.
If May goes the Tory Party will be consumed by a divisive leadership contest in which candidates will present visions of Brexit which are entirely unrealistic ("no deal is better than a bad deal" on the one hand and a bespoke transitional deal on the other). The side which loses is unlikely to come on board with the one that wins, and in the meantime the A50 clock is ticking, the Brexit negotiations will founder and the DUP could well decide that this is a good moment to abandon what is clearly a sinking ship. So a new Tory leader will emerge without a clear mandate from their own Party, without a parliamentary majority and without a realistic Brexit policy. Whoever it is will have no leverage in negotiations with the EU since it will not be clear that they can deliver the support of either their Party or Parliament for their negotiating position.
The UK will be facing the cliff edge with no effective government. This will be a crisis unparalleled since 1945 and as March 2019 approaches there will be panic in some quarters. Then almost anything could happen and the collapse of the entire Brexit process cannot be ruled out.
"I'm beginning to think that Brexit may not happen after all."
Is there any explanation for Boris's actions over the past few weeks other than utter political incompetence? He seems to have totally destroyed his standing with MPs at the one moment that there could have been a chance to strike
I guess his logic is that by setting himself up as the undisputed defender of Brexit, he will win hands down if the vote gets to the euro-sceptic membership.
I think he's already looking beyond that to salvage his legacy and has accepted that Brexit is a dead end. That would explain the surrealistic quality to his recent interventions.
Anyway big picture for a moment. #1 While the referendum result stands until or unless another democratic decision reverses it the ' half life ' of the result proceeds with every passing day. The problem is Brexit is a Zombie. It's animated so must proceed but is dead so has no political momentum. So much of the current angst is to do with Brexit nothing failing politically but still being inevitable. #2 Brexit is not the same as the Leave event. With every passing day the phantasmagoria of the Leave campaign decays into the reality of turgid compromise.
So politics is dominated by something that has to happen but has no independent momentum and won't be what we were promised. It's a formula that will generate more and more static so buckle up.
While Brexit is still overwhelmingly likely to happen ( Zombies can still run toward the finish line ) our more militant Brexiters are right to see the danger. It's why they are becoming increasingly unpleasant on here.
I think all of us would struggle to match you for unpleasantness.
Is there any explanation for Boris's actions over the past few weeks other than utter political incompetence? He seems to have totally destroyed his standing with MPs at the one moment that there could have been a chance to strike
I guess his logic is that by setting himself up as the undisputed defender of Brexit, he will win hands down if the vote gets to the euro-sceptic membership.
I think he's already looking beyond that to salvage his legacy and has accepted that Brexit is a dead end. That would explain the surrealistic quality to his recent interventions.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
Is there any explanation for Boris's actions over the past few weeks other than utter political incompetence? He seems to have totally destroyed his standing with MPs at the one moment that there could have been a chance to strike
I guess his logic is that by setting himself up as the undisputed defender of Brexit, he will win hands down if the vote gets to the euro-sceptic membership.
The flaw seems to be that he has to get the numbers amongst MPs to be one of the names.
Has he got the numbers? Seems unlikely given the public reaction to his efforts this week. Does he know something we don't?
Boris is entirely justified - he must see daily what we all saw in May's speech.
Uninspiring and weak.
Boris for PM is a far better outcome than what we have now.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
The primary issue that led to Brexit was the presence in the British establishment and in particular the Conservative party of too many people suffering from delusions about our place in the world. The humiliation of a failed Brexit will resolve that problem definitively.
If Tory MPs are incapable of behaving then they need to be bypassed. Look to the Lords and beyond for a figure who can lead both the party and the country for 18 months to get us through Brexit. I have a name to float to you who could do that job, is a well-respected statesman and isn't too enmeshed in the current bickering.
Sir John Major.
He's not a Lord.
Chris Patten, then. Not that old, although he may be weary and not want the job. Certainly a statesman.
Hague?
Equally wouldn't want the job.... And that's the problem who in their right mind would want to deal with the current mess..
I'm beginning to think that Brexit may not happen after all.
If May goes the Tory Party will be consumed by a divisive leadership contest in which candidates will present visions of Brexit which are entirely unrealistic ("no deal is better than a bad deal" on the one hand and a bespoke transitional deal on the other). The side which loses is unlikely to come on board with the one that wins, and in the meantime the A50 clock is ticking, the Brexit negotiations will founder and the DUP could well decide that this is a good moment to abandon what is clearly a sinking ship. So a new Tory leader will emerge without a clear mandate from their own Party, without a parliamentary majority and without a realistic Brexit policy. Whoever it is will have no leverage in negotiations with the EU since it will not be clear that they can deliver the support of either their Party or Parliament for their negotiating position.
The UK will be facing the cliff edge with no effective government. This will be a crisis unparalleled since 1945 and as March 2019 approaches there will be panic in some quarters. Then almost anything could happen and the collapse of the entire Brexit process cannot be ruled out.
The crisis was in 1940 not 1945, unless you're referring to the post-war balance of payments/money one.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
As far as I'm aware the EU isn't preparing Operation Sealion.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
The primary issue that led to Brexit was the presence in the British establishment and in particular the Conservative party of too many people suffering from delusions about our place in the world. The humiliation of a failed Brexit will resolve that problem definitively.
Lol - and Catalonia will be having a "we love Spain and the EU" national holiday next week.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
The primary issue that led to Brexit was the presence in the British establishment and in particular the Conservative party of too many people suffering from delusions about our place in the world. The humiliation of a failed Brexit will resolve that problem definitively.
Lol - and Catalonia will be having a "we love Spain and the EU" national holiday next week.
There's a big difference: Spain is sovereign over Catalonia. The EU is not sovereign over the UK. It merely possesses overwhelming power and leverage.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
It would be the end of Westminster, one way or another.
And rightfully so. They would have utterly failed and disgraced themselves.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
The primary issue that led to Brexit was the presence in the British establishment and in particular the Conservative party of too many people suffering from delusions about our place in the world. The humiliation of a failed Brexit will resolve that problem definitively.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
The primary issue that led to Brexit was the presence in the British establishment and in particular the Conservative party of too many people suffering from delusions about our place in the world. The humiliation of a failed Brexit will resolve that problem definitively.
Lol - and Catalonia will be having a "we love Spain and the EU" national holiday next week.
There's a big difference: Spain is sovereign over Catalonia. The EU is not sovereign over the UK. It merely possesses overwhelming power and leverage.
It certainly thinks it does.
In 17 months time when the world doesn't end that might help focus their minds.
3. There is little point the police investigating allegations against a dead person. They cannot be tried. They cannot defend themselves. It is a waste of scarce resources when there are current crimes which need investigation.
4. The relationship between the police and the press needs tightening up. While press publicity may be helpful, releasing details of police raids a la Cliff Richard is a disgrace. The police’s role in the press hounding of that poor man in Bristol does not bear close examination either.
Jimmy Saville was not tried, but was clearly not innocent and it was not a waste of time investigating what happened.
“Clearly not innocent”? The allegations against him remain - as a matter of law - allegations. An investigation into why someone against whom there were suspicions and rumours was allowed access to hospitals etc was certainly worthwhile but that is a very different sort of investigation to one establishing evidence to be taken to a court of law.
But there's stacks of first hand evidence against him, easily enough that if it were an issue in other litigation it would be admissible and would succeed, certainly on the civil standard of proof (balance of probabilities). That prove.
You are confusing the criminal and civil burdens of proof.
In the latter - a claim for money, say, the test is whether on the balance of probabilities the claim is made out and it is a judge who decides.
In a criminal trial, because we are talking about potentially removing someone’s liberty, we have a much tougher burden of proof and rules about what evidence is admissible. Plus a jury. The presumption of innocence is special for precisely that reason. But of course with a dead person the question of their liberty is not an issue which is why it is so wrong to put them on some sort of pseudo trial.
The risk is that this approach - that an allegation is proof and that complainants must always be believed - seeps into the police’s (and others’) approach to live people, with consequent injustice to them. As we have seen with Lord Bramall, Leon Brittan, Harvey Proctor and others.
The good thing is the approach is supposed to be changed now, precisely because it is so problematic. Investigating claims? Fine, within reason. But it must be a properly conducted investigation, which any one done on the basis of believing until proven innocent is not.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
Will go down in history on balance as a bullet dodged. We probably should have got out 10 years ago but better late than never.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
Will go down in history on balance as a bullet dodged. We probably should have got out 10 years ago but better late than never.
If you want to get out of Europe the answer is the same as it has been for hundreds of years - move to the New World. There's no need to screw it up for those of us who are happy here.
" Researchers said drugs were being passed for use across Europe on the basis of indirect measures - such as showing that medication had a biological effect on the body - rather than actual proof they could benefit patients. "
Of course they are: surrogate biomarkers are critical to pharmaceutical innovation.
The industry has done the easy stuff. We need to be creative on the hard stuff.
Bet the Telegraph doesn't explain that Conditional Approval comes with a requirement to submit real world patient data in time?
Is there any explanation for Boris's actions over the past few weeks other than utter political incompetence? He seems to have totally destroyed his standing with MPs at the one moment that there could have been a chance to strike
I guess his logic is that by setting himself up as the undisputed defender of Brexit, he will win hands down if the vote gets to the euro-sceptic membership.
The flaw seems to be that he has to get the numbers amongst MPs to be one of the names.
Has he got the numbers? Seems unlikely given the public reaction to his efforts this week. Does he know something we don't?
Boris is entirely justified - he must see daily what we all saw in May's speech.
Uninspiring and weak.
Boris for PM is a far better outcome than what we have now.
I have reluctantly and unenthusiastically come to the same conclusion. Is he on speaking terms with Gove? Can he patch up his relationship with Osborne and Dave? Not easy in every case but as Davidson put it there are no longer remainers and leavers; there are Brits. We seriously need all hands to the pump. I would bring in Mandelson too.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
I agree. It would cause horrendous issues: real constitutional problems, possibly even some element of civil unrest, depending how it takes place.
I've least thought Hague is the port of call in a crisis.
But wonder whether Howard might make more sense.
He's been the steady hand before.
Hague would be perfect right now.
The Conservatives need someone who is not only a steady pair of hands in a crisis, but also unsullied by past events. That means no-one from the current front bench, and no-one who played a frontline role in any of the Brexit campaigns. If it's a relative outsider, so be it.
But for that to happen, it needs Conservative MPs and members to look down and see the abyss waiting below the swaying vine-rope bridge they are standing on.
Having said that, six months ago virtually everyone on here was saying the same about Labour and Corbyn. The reality is probably that both parties are standing on the bridge above the abyss: the Conservatives are aware of it but seem to prefer the view to getting to safety, whilst Labour believe the abyss has suddenly disappeared and the bridge as sturdy as iron.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
Will go down in history on balance as a bullet dodged. We probably should have got out 10 years ago but better late than never.
If you want to get out of Europe the answer is the same as it has been for hundreds of years - move to the New World. There's no need to screw it up for those of us who are happy here.
Under a democracy shouldn't the majority view prevail ?
Nothing to stop you moving to the EU - say Catalonia - oh wait er..
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
Will go down in history on balance as a bullet dodged. We probably should have got out 10 years ago but better late than never.
If you want to get out of Europe the answer is the same as it has been for hundreds of years - move to the New World. There's no need to screw it up for those of us who are happy here.
Lol. So if you're happy living here but don't like the current political set up and don't fancy Iowa - tough in your world?
Apologies: I thought I was replying to one of the Jonathans.
Historical facts are one thing. Historians and journalist are not the same as investigators.
Professional investigators - such as the police - need to do their job properly according to the law and not stray into other areas, such as alleviating the victims’ pain. My other point is that once someone is dead guilt or innocence in a court of law is irrelevant. Putting a dead person on trial may be an entertaining way of passing a few days but it is not a sensible use of limited police/legal resources.
Anyway am repeating myself now. One doesn’t want to be a bore. I hope I’ve made my point.
And the hound is looking at me pleadingly..........
Thanks to everyone for this fairly interesting conversation. My tuppence-worth (*):
*) There are problems with over-publicising cases; this is an issue with both the police and the media - the former looking for publicity, and the latter stories. When this happens, neither are primarily interested in justice.
*) The needs of the accuser need to be weighed up with the needs of the accused. Whilst it is important for accusers to be given a fair hearing, the accused should not be treated as automatically guilty, even if they have passed on. I fear the police can see such cases as quite easy 'wins'.
*) It may be important for such cases to be investigated even if the accused has died, and especially if there may have been others involved. As an example, one of Saville's close friends was jailed for multiple crimes against youngsters. ISTR this was a result of the investigation into Saville.
(*) Probably over-valued.
The next thing will be to change the burden of proof. The abuser is guilty on a balance of probabilities test. If it is probable that he did it, then he is condemned.
The last 10 days have shown definitively that the only trade deal we will get with the US is one that it dictates. And one that it dictates will be solely concerned with what is best for the US. It may only be Liam Fox and Dan Hannan that do not quite get this yet.
That non exec position on the Monsanto board won't buy itself for Fox.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
Will go down in history on balance as a bullet dodged. We probably should have got out 10 years ago but better late than never.
If you want to get out of Europe the answer is the same as it has been for hundreds of years - move to the New World. There's no need to screw it up for those of us who are happy here.
You don't have right of ownership over our economic and political governance.
I could equally ask you to bugger off to Strasbourg.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
The primary issue that led to Brexit was the presence in the British establishment and in particular the Conservative party of too many people suffering from delusions about our place in the world. The humiliation of a failed Brexit will resolve that problem definitively.
Lol - and Catalonia will be having a "we love Spain and the EU" national holiday next week.
There's a big difference: Spain is sovereign over Catalonia. The EU is not sovereign over the UK. It merely possesses overwhelming power and leverage.
The UK is sovereign over Scotland but you seem happy with the notion of Scottish independence but not Catalan? The UK was sovereign over 26 counties of Ireland and for that matter Cyprus and Malta but their status changed over time and are all now U members.
Personally I don't really have any opinion on Catalonia nor know enough of the ins and outs, but it strikes me if enough want a vote to leave Spain and the vote is a "yes" what's the difference with Scotland?
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
I agree. It would cause horrendous issues: real constitutional problems, possibly even some element of civil unrest, depending how it takes place.
I merely make a prediction, rather than a wish.
We are truly in a grim mess.
Quite so. The UK now has only bad options and worse options. The economic and political future is now more uncertain than at any time since WW2.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
Will go down in history on balance as a bullet dodged. We probably should have got out 10 years ago but better late than never.
If you want to get out of Europe the answer is the same as it has been for hundreds of years - move to the New World. There's no need to screw it up for those of us who are happy here.
Insulting, insensitive and plain wrong. Why should the minority of the voters that voted Remain have more rights than the majority who voted to Leave. In any case, we have not been in Europe (in the sense we are as members of the EU) for hundreds of years. A more accurate formulation would be:
If you want to stay in Europe the answer is the same as it has been for hundreds of years - move to France. There's no need to screw it up for those of us who are happy here.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
I agree. It would cause horrendous issues: real constitutional problems, possibly even some element of civil unrest, depending how it takes place.
I merely make a prediction, rather than a wish.
We are truly in a grim mess.
Whisper it, but the Remainers could win simply by getting the EU to offer a better deal than Dave's deal. Dave's deal+, let's say, with something extra on migration.
I've least thought Hague is the port of call in a crisis.
But wonder whether Howard might make more sense.
He's been the steady hand before.
Hague would be perfect right now.
The Conservatives need someone who is not only a steady pair of hands in a crisis, but also unsullied by past events. That means no-one from the current front bench, and no-one who played a frontline role in any of the Brexit campaigns. If it's a relative outsider, so be it.
But for that to happen, it needs Conservative MPs and members to look down and see the abyss waiting below the swaying vine-rope bridge they are standing on.
Having said that, six months ago virtually everyone on here was saying the same about Labour and Corbyn. The reality is probably that both parties are standing on the bridge above the abyss: the Conservatives are aware of it but seem to prefer the view to getting to safety, whilst Labour believe the abyss has suddenly disappeared and the bridge as sturdy as iron.
The 'steady pair of hands' theory was what led to the coronation of May in the first place.
The fundamental fact is that no politician is able to solve this problem. People are projecting impossible hopes on to John Major, William Hague, etc.
Actually, that article seems to be a very good example of influential people within the EU27 beginning to wake up to the damage which they will cause to themselves if they don't do a deal. However, it's probably too late.
The article should be read in conjunction with this one:
To avoid substantial damage to both sides, there needs to be substantial progress within three months from now on the transitional arrangement, which in turn means agreeing an outline of the future relationship (because you can't agree a transitional arrangement without knowing what you're transitioning to).
Since the probability of agreeing anything much within three months is close to zero, mainly because of the EU's intransigence but made worse by the UK electorate's refusal to give Theresa May a mandate to negotiate, it is prudent to assume it will be a disaster for both sides.
My advice remains: Plan your affairs accordingly, as best you can.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
I agree. It would cause horrendous issues: real constitutional problems, possibly even some element of civil unrest, depending how it takes place.
I merely make a prediction, rather than a wish.
We are truly in a grim mess.
Quite so. The UK now has only bad options and worse options. The economic and political future is now more uncertain than at any time since WW2.
Which is exactly why we need some inspiration from the top - not soggy wet managerial soup from Hammon and May.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
The primary issue that led to Brexit was the presence in the British establishment and in particular the Conservative party of too many people suffering from delusions about our place in the world. The humiliation of a failed Brexit will resolve that problem definitively.
Lol - and Catalonia will be having a "we love Spain and the EU" national holiday next week.
There's a big difference: Spain is sovereign over Catalonia. The EU is not sovereign over the UK. It merely possesses overwhelming power and leverage.
The UK is sovereign over Scotland but you seem happy with the notion of Scottish independence but not Catalan? The UK was sovereign over 26 counties of Ireland and for that matter Cyprus and Malta but their status changed over time and are all now U members.
Personally I don't really have any opinion on Catalonia nor know enough of the ins and outs, but it strikes me if enough want a vote to leave Spain and the vote is a "yes" what's the difference with Scotland?
Like you I don't really have an opinion on Catalonia beyond the obvious that repression is not the answer. I would tend to think that the option of a federal Spain is the most sensible.
My reading of the May situation today is that the Cabinet have circled the wagons and formed a laager around May. They want her to stay and take the hit.
But, that might not be enough. Its the backbench MPs triggered a vote of confidence (which they cannot control) they should be worried about, and that's what could bring her down.
Osborne will sense weakness and jump at her throat until he can sink his teeth in, now.
Actually, that article seems to be a very good example of influential people within the EU27 beginning to wake up to the damage which they will cause to themselves if they don't do a deal. However, it's probably too late.
The article should be read in conjunction with this one:
To avoid substantial damage to both sides, there needs to be substantial progress within three months from now on the transitional arrangement, which in turn means agreeing an outline of the future relationship (because you can't agree a transitional arrangement without knowing what you're transitioning to).
Since the probability of agreeing anything much within three months is close to zero, mainly because of the EU's intransigence but made worse by the UK electorate's refusal to give Theresa May a mandate to negotiate, it is prudent to assume it will be a disaster for both sides.
My advice remains: Plan your affairs accordingly, as best you can.
How? Like most people, my assets, equity, savings and salaried work is all here.
There's nothing I can do but deleverage, hunker and ride out the storm.
To avoid substantial damage to both sides, there needs to be substantial progress within three months from now on the transitional arrangement...
How will the EU sustain any damage due to uncertainty during the negotiations? As far as I can see it's all one sided unless it actually came to the crunch.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
Yeah it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, and will be a mere footnote in the history books. I wish things like climate change got even half as much attention from the political class etc.
A poorly managed Brexit has the potential to rapidly accelerate a relative decline because of the disruption it creates. It means that government is focussed on Brexit at the expense of other more important things in a rapidly changing world. I don't personally see the sunlit uplands anywhere.
The UK is in political chaos and with its debt spiralling out of control.
Great empires fall in to dust, that is what it looks like is happening now.
My reading of the May situation today is that the Cabinet have circled the wagons and formed a laager around May. They want her to stay and take the hit.
But, that might not be enough. Its the backbench MPs triggered a vote of confidence (which they cannot control) they should be worried about, and that's what could bring her down.
Osborne will sense weakness and jump at her throat until he can sink his teeth in, now.
My guess is that it will be Theresa and Philip May themselves that will realize this can't go on and the pressure she's under is intolerable.
Actually, that article seems to be a very good example of influential people within the EU27 beginning to wake up to the damage which they will cause to themselves if they don't do a deal. However, it's probably too late.
The article should be read in conjunction with this one:
To avoid substantial damage to both sides, there needs to be substantial progress within three months from now on the transitional arrangement, which in turn means agreeing an outline of the future relationship (because you can't agree a transitional arrangement without knowing what you're transitioning to).
Since the probability of agreeing anything much within three months is close to zero, mainly because of the EU's intransigence but made worse by the UK electorate's refusal to give Theresa May a mandate to negotiate, it is prudent to assume it will be a disaster for both sides.
My advice remains: Plan your affairs accordingly, as best you can.
I switched a bit more over to US equities in anticipation of the Milipocalypse for my pension pot. Even though it never arrived I'm pretty sure my pension is now worth a touch more than it otherwise would have been.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
As far as I'm aware the EU isn't preparing Operation Sealion.
I agree inasmuch as there are much more important issues we should be considering such as housing and the huge question of age - not only how do we care for the elderly but how do we change our economic culture so more people spend more thoroughly for their retirement so are not just dependent on rising house prices.
Pensions as we know may them may become unaffordable but the notion of saving for retirement isn't going to go away.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
I agree. It would cause horrendous issues: real constitutional problems, possibly even some element of civil unrest, depending how it takes place.
I merely make a prediction, rather than a wish.
We are truly in a grim mess.
Quite so. The UK now has only bad options and worse options. The economic and political future is now more uncertain than at any time since WW2.
Which is exactly why we need some inspiration from the top - not soggy wet managerial soup from Hammon and May.
Inspiration can come only from a leader who has a coherent, achievable strategy and is able to carry his/her party with them. The Tory Party in its current state cannot produce such a person.
Are we going to have the same rigmarole again where Tory MPs try to arrange a situation where just one candidate is presented to the membership by pressuring the second candidate to drop out?
My reading of the May situation today is that the Cabinet have circled the wagons and formed a laager around May. They want her to stay and take the hit.
But, that might not be enough. Its the backbench MPs triggered a vote of confidence (which they cannot control) they should be worried about, and that's what could bring her down.
Osborne will sense weakness and jump at her throat until he can sink his teeth in, now.
Never underestimate how liable Tory MPs are to bottling it at the last minute, even if they've been sounding off in the run-up to the vote.
People cite IDS as the example of how the Tories would have no qualms about getting rid of a leader if they thought it necessary, but they seem to forget that (a) the vote of no confidence against him was pretty narrow, even though he was far more of an unmitigated disaster than May is, and (b) it is in any case far less turbulent to get rid of a leader of the opposition than a sitting PM.
Are we going to have the same rigmarole again where Tory MPs try to arrange a situation where just one candidate is presented to the membership by pressuring the second candidate to drop out?
Are we going to have the same rigmarole again where Tory MPs try to arrange a situation where just one candidate is presented to the membership by pressuring the second candidate to drop out?
Probably, it worked so well the last time that the Tories will do it again.
Is a suicide bomber, who by definition can never be convicted of their crime, innocent?
The Scottish courts have the verdict of "unproven" which is quite useful in my view
It's actually not proven. It is still an acquittal. I am not sure that would satisfy the angry hoards.
Good example. In Scotland we need corroborative evidence. This can come from similar fact crimes. So 2 victims of sexual abuse can corroborate each other. A few years ago my late father was on the jury of such a case. One complainer was clearly telling the truth. The other, unfortunately, wouldn't have known the truth if it hit her over the head. She had had a very hard life. The jury found the accused not guilty of the latter but not proven of the former.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
I agree. It would cause horrendous issues: real constitutional problems, possibly even some element of civil unrest, depending how it takes place.
I merely make a prediction, rather than a wish.
We are truly in a grim mess.
Whisper it, but the Remainers could win simply by getting the EU to offer a better deal than Dave's deal. Dave's deal+, let's say, with something extra on migration.
But the EU are too dumb to see or do that.
Indeed - I think that is true. Those at the centre in the EU project are pushing the pu ishment line too far.
How? Like most people, my assets, equity, savings and salaried work is all here.
There's nothing I can do but deleverage, hunker and ride out the storm.
Yes, for most people there isn't much they can do. Not getting over-leveraged is certainly a good idea. Some people will be able to increase savings, but of course that's hard or impossible for many. You might be able to shift your mortgage on to a long fixed-rate deal. If you have a money-purchase pension scheme, you may be able to diversify the investments into ones which are not dependent on the UK economy. If possible, make as much use as you can of tax-free shelters (pensions and ISAs), because although those wouldn't necessarily be completely safe from John McDonnell, it's not likely that existing investments in them would be hit by him - at least, it wouldn't be his first port of call.
Prosecuting in the courts of E & W is a specific game with its own rules. Outside the gamespace, the specific rules cease to apply. I am, for instance, convinced beyond reasonable doubt that OBL was responsible for 9/11, but only on grounds of, what, 10th hand evidence which would be entirely inadmissible in court. Compare the game of Scrabble: if the players have agreed that Collins is the official dictionary, then it is true to say, within the gamespace, that the OED is utterly worthless as evidence of a word being in the English language, whereas outside the gamespace that claim would be bonkers.
And I don't get this "water under the bridge, he's dead" argument either. The way the country was in Heath's lifetime is crucially relevant to the way things are today, and that's ignoring the fact that investigating Heath might throw up other, still living persons of interest.
@Richard_Nabavi I don't dispute for a moment that this is a disaster for both sides. Or " us " as I still think of both sides. It reminds me of the ' Guns of August ' which I read last year.
And I don't get this "water under the bridge, he's dead" argument either. The way the country was in Heath's lifetime is crucially relevant to the way things are today, and that's ignoring the fact that investigating Heath might throw up other, still living persons of interest.
Given unlimited resources yes, but this is historical abuse and surely it's a better use of police and the courts time to investigate real serious crimes happening now than fishing expeditions.
Is a suicide bomber, who by definition can never be convicted of their crime, innocent?
The Scottish courts have the verdict of "unproven" which is quite useful in my view
It's actually not proven. It is still an acquittal. I am not sure that would satisfy the angry hoards.
Good example. In Scotland we need corroborative evidence. This can come from similar fact crimes. So 2 victims of sexual abuse can corroborate each other. A few years ago my late father was on the jury of such a case. One complainer was clearly telling the truth. The other, unfortunately, wouldn't have known the truth if it hit her over the head. She had had a very hard life. The jury found the accused not guilty of the latter but not proven of the former.
But the accused walked free.
It's not about "satisfying angry hoards", or even hordes, it's about establishing the truth. You sound like a remainer dismissing Leave voters as moronic proles.
Those who think Brexit won't happen at all, and that we'll happily revert to the status quo once we wisely see the error of our ways need to get real.
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
I agree. It would cause horrendous issues: real constitutional problems, possibly even some element of civil unrest, depending how it takes place.
I merely make a prediction, rather than a wish.
We are truly in a grim mess.
Quite so. The UK now has only bad options and worse options. The economic and political future is now more uncertain than at any time since WW2.
Which is exactly why we need some inspiration from the top - not soggy wet managerial soup from Hammon and May.
Inspiration can come only from a leader who has a coherent, achievable strategy and is able to carry his/her party with them. The Tory Party in its current state cannot produce such a person.
May's trouble is as much what should have happened rather than what did.
Even if there had been zero mishaps, what was in that overegged, overhyped speech other than the same old stuff, with a bit of personal backstory thrown in?
A Miliband energy policy, a scattering of council houses, and the Government nationalising your organs.
How will the EU sustain any damage due to uncertainty during the negotiations? As far as I can see it's all one sided unless it actually came to the crunch.
The uncertainty factor is certainly worse for us. But I think that, unless we start discussing a trade deal very soon, then it won't happen. As Hammond has pointed out, the prospect of a trade deal is a wasting asset for the UK, precisely because the uncertainty hits us more badly. Those jobs moved out of London because of uncertainty won't come back if there's a last minute deal, so why would we pay zillions of Euros for a last minute deal?
How? Like most people, my assets, equity, savings and salaried work is all here.
There's nothing I can do but deleverage, hunker and ride out the storm.
Yes, for most people there isn't much they can do. Not getting over-leveraged is certainly a good idea. Some people will be able to increase savings, but of course that's hard or impossible for many. You might be able to shift your mortgage on to a long fixed-rate deal. If you have a money-purchase pension scheme, you may be able to diversify the investments into ones which are not dependent on the UK economy. If possible, make as much use as you can of tax-free shelters (pensions and ISAs), because although those wouldn't necessarily be completely safe from John McDonnell, it's not likely that existing investments in them would be hit by him - at least, it wouldn't be his first port of call.
And I don't get this "water under the bridge, he's dead" argument either. The way the country was in Heath's lifetime is crucially relevant to the way things are today, and that's ignoring the fact that investigating Heath might throw up other, still living persons of interest.
Given unlimited resources yes, but this is historical abuse and surely it's a better use of police and the courts time to investigate real serious crimes happening now than fishing expeditions.
They could try popping into a couple of carry out shops or a care home in Rotherham , for example. Who knows what they might discover if they only looked.
@Richard_Nabavi I don't dispute for a moment that this is a disaster for both sides. Or " us " as I still think of both sides. It reminds me of the ' Guns of August ' which I read last year.
I've least thought Hague is the port of call in a crisis.
But wonder whether Howard might make more sense.
He's been the steady hand before.
Hague would be perfect right now.
The Conservatives need someone who is not only a steady pair of hands in a crisis, but also unsullied by past events. That means no-one from the current front bench, and no-one who played a frontline role in any of the Brexit campaigns. If it's a relative outsider, so be it.
But for that to happen, it needs Conservative MPs and members to look down and see the abyss waiting below the swaying vine-rope bridge they are standing on.
Having said that, six months ago virtually everyone on here was saying the same about Labour and Corbyn. The reality is probably that both parties are standing on the bridge above the abyss: the Conservatives are aware of it but seem to prefer the view to getting to safety, whilst Labour believe the abyss has suddenly disappeared and the bridge as sturdy as iron.
The 'steady pair of hands' theory was what led to the coronation of May in the first place.
(Snip)
That might be true in the case of May, but that does not mean the Conservatives should deliberately choose an unsteady pair of hands, such as Boris or Davis.
Great news — my favourite author has won the Nobel Prize for Literature, Kazuo Ishiguro. The Unconsoled is like nothing else I've read, (in a good way).
How will the EU sustain any damage due to uncertainty during the negotiations? As far as I can see it's all one sided unless it actually came to the crunch.
The uncertainty factor is certainly worse for us. But I think that, unless we start discussing a trade deal very soon, then it won't happen. As Hammond has pointed out, the prospect of a trade deal is a wasting asset for the UK, precisely because the uncertainty hits us more badly. Those jobs moved out of London because of uncertainty won't come back if there's a last minute deal, so why would we pay zillions of Euros for a last minute deal?
Perversely, if May's blown her stack, that's also an argument for getting rid of her, now, and coronating someone with a bit more savvy and va-va-voom to get progress by Xmas.
Boris is a lucky b*****d isn't he. He mucked up his previous leadership attempt just a few months ago and, for most people, that would be it. But now he's probably going to get a second opportunity.
Comments
To give a positive Brexit we need someone who actually thinks Brexit is a positive and has a positive vision for how we get there.
That's not May, its not Patten its not Major. It could be Boris or Gove etc
But wonder whether Howard might make more sense.
He's been the steady hand before.
https://www.ft.com/content/768843e8-a839-11e7-93c5-648314d2c72c
So politics is dominated by something that has to happen but has no independent momentum and won't be what we were promised. It's a formula that will generate more and more static so buckle up.
While Brexit is still overwhelmingly likely to happen ( Zombies can still run toward the finish line ) our more militant Brexiters are right to see the danger. It's why they are becoming increasingly unpleasant on here.
*) There are problems with over-publicising cases; this is an issue with both the police and the media - the former looking for publicity, and the latter stories. When this happens, neither are primarily interested in justice.
*) The needs of the accuser need to be weighed up with the needs of the accused. Whilst it is important for accusers to be given a fair hearing, the accused should not be treated as automatically guilty, even if they have passed on. I fear the police can see such cases as quite easy 'wins'.
*) It may be important for such cases to be investigated even if the accused has died, and especially if there may have been others involved. As an example, one of Saville's close friends was jailed for multiple crimes against youngsters. ISTR this was a result of the investigation into Saville.
(*) Probably over-valued.
If May goes the Tory Party will be consumed by a divisive leadership contest in which candidates will present visions of Brexit which are entirely unrealistic ("no deal is better than a bad deal" on the one hand and a bespoke transitional deal on the other). The side which loses is unlikely to come on board with the one that wins, and in the meantime the A50 clock is ticking, the Brexit negotiations will founder and the DUP could well decide that this is a good moment to abandon what is clearly a sinking ship. So a new Tory leader will emerge without a clear mandate from their own Party, without a parliamentary majority and without a realistic Brexit policy. Whoever it is will have no leverage in negotiations with the EU since it will not be clear that they can deliver the support of either their Party or Parliament for their negotiating position.
The UK will be facing the cliff edge with no effective government. This will be a crisis unparalleled since 1945 and as March 2019 approaches there will be panic in some quarters. Then almost anything could happen and the collapse of the entire Brexit process cannot be ruled out.
The flaw seems to be that he has to get the numbers amongst MPs to be one of the names.
Has he got the numbers? Seems unlikely given the public reaction to his efforts this week. Does he know something we don't?
Welcome aboard!!
One comment was that JRM was stealing his shine as Chief Hard Brexit defender.
Perhaps Boris did see that and felt he had to act?
No doubt many Remainers would breathe a huge sigh of relief.
But, they should consider the consequences for the UK (and for the EU, for that matter) of half the country being denied what they voted for, and a sullen, resentful and humiliated UK back in the EU - very likely on worse terms than before - with none of the underlying issues that led to Brexit in the first place having been resolved.
Uninspiring and weak.
Boris for PM is a far better outcome than what we have now.
We really need to dial down the rhetoric here. This isn't a question of national survival. It is (at worst) an economic slump brought on by a major change in our trading relationship.
As far as I'm aware the EU isn't preparing Operation Sealion.
I could lose serious money if this idea gets any traction. :-(
It would certainly reward those on here who have been advocating laying the favourites every time one is mentioned!
And rightfully so. They would have utterly failed and disgraced themselves.
1 ) The Cameroons have been supporting her for fear of Boris taking over
2 ) Team Cameroon have concluded that Boris won’t win
Is all interesting as Dave has been shoring up Mrs May recently, keep your eye out for Cameroons breaking ranks.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/05/german-firms-told-prepare-hard-brexit-heavy-economic-losses
In 17 months time when the world doesn't end that might help focus their minds.
The industry has done the easy stuff. We need to be creative on the hard stuff.
Bet the Telegraph doesn't explain that Conditional Approval comes with a requirement to submit real world patient data in time?
I merely make a prediction, rather than a wish.
We are truly in a grim mess.
But for that to happen, it needs Conservative MPs and members to look down and see the abyss waiting below the swaying vine-rope bridge they are standing on.
Having said that, six months ago virtually everyone on here was saying the same about Labour and Corbyn. The reality is probably that both parties are standing on the bridge above the abyss: the Conservatives are aware of it but seem to prefer the view to getting to safety, whilst Labour believe the abyss has suddenly disappeared and the bridge as sturdy as iron.
Nothing to stop you moving to the EU - say Catalonia - oh wait er..
Does he resign in time for the Sunday papers deadlines?
Are the phone lines humming?
I could equally ask you to bugger off to Strasbourg.
This Con voter certainly is.
We don't need a steady pair of hands - we need a clearout of the dross and some new faces.
Personally I don't really have any opinion on Catalonia nor know enough of the ins and outs, but it strikes me if enough want a vote to leave Spain and the vote is a "yes" what's the difference with Scotland?
If you want to stay in Europe the answer is the same as it has been for hundreds of years - move to France. There's no need to screw it up for those of us who are happy here.
But the EU are too dumb to see or do that.
The fundamental fact is that no politician is able to solve this problem. People are projecting impossible hopes on to John Major, William Hague, etc.
The article should be read in conjunction with this one:
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2017/10/5/boe-bank-supervisor-sees-christmas-deadline-for-brexit-bridge
To avoid substantial damage to both sides, there needs to be substantial progress within three months from now on the transitional arrangement, which in turn means agreeing an outline of the future relationship (because you can't agree a transitional arrangement without knowing what you're transitioning to).
Since the probability of agreeing anything much within three months is close to zero, mainly because of the EU's intransigence but made worse by the UK electorate's refusal to give Theresa May a mandate to negotiate, it is prudent to assume it will be a disaster for both sides.
My advice remains: Plan your affairs accordingly, as best you can.
But, that might not be enough. Its the backbench MPs triggered a vote of confidence (which they cannot control) they should be worried about, and that's what could bring her down.
Osborne will sense weakness and jump at her throat until he can sink his teeth in, now.
There's nothing I can do but deleverage, hunker and ride out the storm.
The UK is in political chaos and with its debt spiralling out of control.
Great empires fall in to dust, that is what it looks like is happening now.
Pensions as we know may them may become unaffordable but the notion of saving for retirement isn't going to go away.
People cite IDS as the example of how the Tories would have no qualms about getting rid of a leader if they thought it necessary, but they seem to forget that (a) the vote of no confidence against him was pretty narrow, even though he was far more of an unmitigated disaster than May is, and (b) it is in any case far less turbulent to get rid of a leader of the opposition than a sitting PM.
Good example. In Scotland we need corroborative evidence. This can come from similar fact crimes. So 2 victims of sexual abuse can corroborate each other. A few years ago my late father was on the jury of such a case. One complainer was clearly telling the truth. The other, unfortunately, wouldn't have known the truth if it hit her over the head. She had had a very hard life. The jury found the accused not guilty of the latter but not proven of the former.
But the accused walked free.
And I don't get this "water under the bridge, he's dead" argument either. The way the country was in Heath's lifetime is crucially relevant to the way things are today, and that's ignoring the fact that investigating Heath might throw up other, still living persons of interest.
Even if there had been zero mishaps, what was in that overegged, overhyped speech other than the same old stuff, with a bit of personal backstory thrown in?
A Miliband energy policy, a scattering of council houses, and the Government nationalising your organs.
Again
Great news — my favourite author has won the Nobel Prize for Literature, Kazuo Ishiguro. The Unconsoled is like nothing else I've read, (in a good way).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/news/kazuo-ishiguro-wins-nobel-prize-literature/
https://twitter.com/thespainreport/status/915868363636781056
N O V E M B E R