I wonder how many people understand what's meant by 'nationalisation', 'privatisation' and so on. The debate hasn't really been had since the 1990s and there's a whole generation grown up since then.
The question would be better worded as 'owned and run by the government', or 'owned and run by private companies'.
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 coordinating someone with a bit more savvy and va-va-voom to get progress by Xmas.
Someone new with more voom would take two months to get elected and another two to get up to speed on negotiations and the trade offs involved. Even longer given they would have to manage the stakeholders in the Tory party who would be using the shake up to push for what they have given up on under May. In addition, Barnier would use the debacle to blame everything on the British.
If the Tories have a leadership election, there will not be a deal at all.
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.
Conversely, if he hadn't launched an attempt last weekend, he would now be "the obvious choice"
This is what will do for the Catalan separatists. Much of their cause has been driven by the belief that Catalonia gives too much to Spain and gets too little back. In other words, at root it's all about money. So, when the money starts to leave Catalonia, a lot of Catalans are going to start asking themselves whether being wealthy and autonomous inside Spain is really a worse deal than being much poorer and more isolated outside. The current independence group is a very mixed bag politically, ranging from anarchists through "socialists" to the centre right. The centre right is probably the biggest bloc. My guess is that if the Spanish state pays things right - and that is a huge if with the PP in charge - a lot of that centre right support for separation could peel away and be prepared to do a deal.
Perversely, if May's blown her stack, that's also an argument for getting rid of her, now, and coordinating someone with a bit more savvy and va-va-voom to get progress by Xmas.
The problem from the start is the Conservative Party has decided a national negotiation with national and global outcomes should be conducted primarily for the benefit of the unity of the Conservative Party.
From 24/6/16, there should have been an inclusive negotiating process involving, whisper it quietly, even people on the REMAIN side, to try and build a national concensus around our objectives from the A50 process before said process was invoked.
Instead, we had months of indecision and waffle followed by a pointless, time-consuming and futile General Election. I still don't know what the British Government wants and I'm not convinced or impressed by platitudes from the likes of May, Hammond and Davis.
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've been having similar thoughts.
Moreover, looking at the latest economic stats, car sales, construction, it seems like we might finally be heading into that Brexit Recession. Project Fear might be coming true - belatedly.
That alters things.
I don't think we will revoke A50, but I can see the UK pleading to join EEA/EFTA come 2019. And our pleas will probably be accepted.
No controls on immigration will mean a UKIP comeback. That guarantees a Corbyn government.
This is what will do for the Catalan separatists. Much of their cause has been driven by the belief that Catalonia gives too much to Spain and gets too little back. In other words, at root it's all about money. So, when the money starts to leave Catalonia, a lot of Catalans are going to start asking themselves whether being wealthy and autonomous inside Spain is really a worse deal than being much poorer and more isolated outside.
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 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 coordinating someone with a bit more savvy and va-va-voom to get progress by Xmas.
Someone new with more voom would take two months to get elected and another two to get up to speed on negotiations and the trade offs involved. Even longer given they would have to manage the stakeholders in the Tory party who would be using the shake up to push for what they have given up on under May. In addition, Barnier would use the debacle to blame everything on the British.
If the Tories have a leadership election, there will not be a deal at all.
That's why I said coronated mate, although it was autocorrected (confusingly) to coordinated.
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?
Problem is that they are spoilt for choice when it comes to potential candidates that it would be reckless to put before their electorate....
Tory rebels have said that there is a "50/50" chance they will confront Theresa May in the next three days and demand that she steps down before the end of the year.
Ed Vaizey, a former minister, today became the first Tory MP to break ranks and said that "quite a few people are firmly of the view that she should resign" after her disastrous conference speech.
The Telegraph understands that the rebels, who have the support of around 30 Tory MPs, believe there is a "small window of opportunity" to force the Prime Minister out.
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?
And many in business are still completely unaware of the politics - a City group (can't remember which one) put out a statement this week saying they would begin moving people out of London unless there was a transition deal in place by December. Which is clearly an impossible deadline. Business has got used to the idea that the economic factors involved in any decision will trump the political factors as this has almost always been the case since at least the 1970s. At some point in the near future the realisation that Brexit is going ahead without a transition deal, and despite the economic damage, is going to dawn. This is likely to have a very negative effect on markets, particularly currency markets, which will add to the sense of crisis.
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.
As I said months back. But timing is everything, as it's a "one shot" game.
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?
You're thinking rationally about this.
This is high stakes political poker played as Russian roulette with the economy in the gun barrel.
I wonder how many people understand what's meant by 'nationalisation', 'privatisation' and so on. The debate hasn't really been had since the 1990s and there's a whole generation grown up since then.
The question would be better worded as 'owned and run by the government', or 'owned and run by private companies'.
I agree, but it's entirely possible that wording the questions in the way you say would produce MORE support for nationalisation.
As Stephen Bush has been saying, the breakdowns of the YouGov poll last week suggested the oldies are more supportive of nationalisation than younger voters are: my suspicion is this is because a lot of younger people don't really know what nationalisation is but maybe have a vague memory of learning that the Soviet Union did it, and so automatically assume it would be a bad thing.
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 coordinating someone with a bit more savvy and va-va-voom to get progress by Xmas.
Someone new with more voom would take two months to get elected and another two to get up to speed on negotiations and the trade offs involved. Even longer given they would have to manage the stakeholders in the Tory party who would be using the shake up to push for what they have given up on under May. In addition, Barnier would use the debacle to blame everything on the British.
If the Tories have a leadership election, there will not be a deal at all.
That's why I said coronated mate, although it was autocorrected (confusingly) to coordinated.
Who can be coronated? If it's a Remainer then a Leaver will be put up against them by the sceptics. If it's Boris there will be another candidate because so many don't trust him. Most of the other Leavers are too junior. The only option is Davis.
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.
eir 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've been having similar thoughts.
Moreover, looking at the latest economic stats, car sales, construction, it seems like we might finally be heading into that Brexit Recession. Project Fear might be coming true - belatedly.
That alters things.
I don't think we will revoke A50, but I can see the UK pleading to join EEA/EFTA come 2019. And our pleas will probably be accepted.
No controls on immigration will mean a UKIP comeback. That guarantees a Corbyn government.
The fall in the £ and the coming slowdown/recession is killing off the immigration debate, anyway. The numbers are dropping fast.
Moreover, the voters seem quite happy to support Jeremy Corbyn, and he wants no immigration control at all.
Meanwhile, UKIP are finished.
It's more what could replace UKIP you might want to be worried about.
Tory rebels have said that there is a "50/50" chance they will confront Theresa May in the next three days and demand that she steps down before the end of the year.
Ed Vaizey, a former minister, today became the first Tory MP to break ranks and said that "quite a few people are firmly of the view that she should resign" after her disastrous conference speech.
The Telegraph understands that the rebels, who have the support of around 30 Tory MPs, believe there is a "small window of opportunity" to force the Prime Minister out.
Tory rebels have said that there is a "50/50" chance they will confront Theresa May in the next three days and demand that she steps down before the end of the year.
Ed Vaizey, a former minister, today became the first Tory MP to break ranks and said that "quite a few people are firmly of the view that she should resign" after her disastrous conference speech.
The Telegraph understands that the rebels, who have the support of around 30 Tory MPs, believe there is a "small window of opportunity" to force the Prime Minister out.
Tory rebels have said that there is a "50/50" chance they will confront Theresa May in the next three days and demand that she steps down before the end of the year.
Ed Vaizey, a former minister, today became the first Tory MP to break ranks and said that "quite a few people are firmly of the view that she should resign" after her disastrous conference speech.
The Telegraph understands that the rebels, who have the support of around 30 Tory MPs, believe there is a "small window of opportunity" to force the Prime Minister out.
I wonder how many people understand what's meant by 'nationalisation', 'privatisation' and so on. The debate hasn't really been had since the 1990s and there's a whole generation grown up since then.
The question would be better worded as 'owned and run by the government', or 'owned and run by private companies'.
I think there are more models of hybrid ownership out there than 20-30 years ago. For all the flak thrown at them in the past, I quite like the Network Rail model and we have all sorts of arms length companies in the public sector.
I think neither fully-Government run companies not fully-private operated companies are always the ideal for certain activities.
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 coordinating someone with a bit more savvy and va-va-voom to get progress by Xmas.
Someone new with more voom would take two months to get elected and another two to get up to speed on negotiations and the trade offs involved. Even longer given they would have to manage the stakeholders in the Tory party who would be using the shake up to push for what they have given up on under May. In addition, Barnier would use the debacle to blame everything on the British.
If the Tories have a leadership election, there will not be a deal at all.
That's why I said coronated mate, although it was autocorrected (confusingly) to coordinated.
Who can be coronated? If it's a Remainer then a Leaver will be put up against them by the sceptics. If it's Boris there will be another candidate because so many don't trust him. Most of the other Leavers are too junior. The only option is Davis.
Davis might be the best bet to sell a Mr Everyman failure to deliver Brexit. The Eddie the Eagle of high politics.
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 Parbe ruled out.
I've been having similar thoughts.
Moreover, looking at the latest economic stats, car sales, construction, it seems like we might finally be heading into that Brexit Recession. Project Fear might be coming true - belatedly.
That alters things.
I don't think we will revoke A50, but I can see the UK pleading to join EEA/EFTA come 2019. And our pleas will probably be accepted.
You should be delighted. Didn't Brexiters want a rebasing of our economy away from consumption, and fripperies, and low productivity.
A recession is perfect for forcing the British workforce and the boss class to address some of the endemic ills we have become so angry about, these past 40 years.
Huzzah!
On topic, I am in the she can't go camp. At this point, to waste any time whatsoever on a leadership election would be a gross dereliction of the duty the government owes the country. (Cue resignation announcement.)
How do I put my assets somewhere safe, so that Labour party can't devour them?
My London home is my home, so it will just have to ride out the storm. But I have a lot of liquid cash sploshing around. WTF do I do with it in a way that protects it?
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 coordinating someone with a bit more savvy and va-va-voom to get progress by Xmas.
Someone new with more voom would take two months to get elected and another two to get up to speed on negotiations and the trade offs involved. Even longer given they would have to manage the stakeholders in the Tory party who would be using the shake up to push for what they have given up on under May. In addition, Barnier would use the debacle to blame everything on the British.
If the Tories have a leadership election, there will not be a deal at all.
That's why I said coronated mate, although it was autocorrected (confusingly) to coordinated.
Who can be coronated? If it's a Remainer then a Leaver will be put up against them by the sceptics. If it's Boris there will be another candidate because so many don't trust him. Most of the other Leavers are too junior. The only option is Davis.
Davis might be the best bet to sell a Mr Everyman failure to deliver Brexit. The Eddie the Eagle of high politics.
WilliamGlenn on why candidate X (where X is whomever is most in vogue) is the best candidate to lead the UK back to the heart of the EU.
How do I put my assets somewhere safe, so that Labour party can't devour them?
My London home is my home, so it will just have to ride out the storm. But I have a lot of liquid cash sploshing around. WTF do I do with it in a way that protects it?
I know a Nigerian prince with a cash flow problem who might be able to help you out....
“Better to have a prime minister who coughs during one speech than someone who wants to be prime minister who makes most audiences splutter in most of his speeches.”
How do I put my assets somewhere safe, so that Labour party can't devour them?
My London home is my home, so it will just have to ride out the storm. But I have a lot of liquid cash sploshing around. WTF do I do with it in a way that protects it?
It's quite hard to be optimistic about UK PLC right now.
I just need to know how I can hide my money from Corbyn and McDonnell.
The country is fucked.
When you voted Leave you didnt realise that was your best alternative?
I am on record as saying that if Corbyn and McDonell attain power, and prove as bad as I expect, then I will officially regret my LEAVE vote (but not until). Brexit, in strange and bizarre aways, led to Corbyn's ascent. It couldn't have been predicted, but there is a causal link.
But I don't regret my LEAVE vote yet, even as I stockpile canned food and ammo.
More likely the general discontent with the current state of affairs led both to Brexit and (potentially) Corbyn. Unless you really believe Cameron would have held the Tories together in the event of a narrow Remain win. Which I don't.
As the FTSE heads back toward another all-time high, I do wonder why people are worried. If you have cash, stick it into non-British FTSE companies and as the pound falls and the price rises, cash out as and when you want.
It's quite hard to be optimistic about UK PLC right now.
I just need to know how I can hide my money from Corbyn and McDonnell.
The country is fucked.
Are you having another wobbly meltdown again?
Yes.
One thing, unless the Tories agree to an election, there won't be one I believe. Does not the FTPA require a two thirds super majority? So at present Corbyn would be in Govt on 262 plus 35 SNP plus 4 Plaid 12 Lib Dems, 1 Green, 1 Lady Harmon and 10 DUP (however unlikely) plus the Speaker = 326 v 317 meaning only the Libs or DUP abstaining is enough to out vote him if all the Tories are against. At the least at present, the wilder fringes of the programme would not see the light of day. Now the Tories, or enough of them, might decide an election is needed whatever and come 2020 (four and a half years mind) one happens anyway, but it's not exactly "like for like swap Govt replacement".
At the least you have some time if you wish to rearrange your affairs.
Thing is have they got a candidate in mind? Presumably Rudd or Hammond but they're just as likely to end up with JRM given the way politics is playing out over the past couple of years...
2/1 Theresa May to leave this year (caution -- what there is left of it) with Corals: in from 3/1 yesterday. A fraction less on Betfair's illiquid market.
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?
No, because TM ended up being the only option and thus avoided being found out as an electoral disaster.
I wonder how many people understand what's meant by 'nationalisation', 'privatisation' and so on. The debate hasn't really been had since the 1990s and there's a whole generation grown up since then.
The question would be better worded as 'owned and run by the government', or 'owned and run by private companies'.
I think there are more models of hybrid ownership out there than 20-30 years ago. For all the flak thrown at them in the past, I quite like the Network Rail model and we have all sorts of arms length companies in the public sector.
I think neither fully-Government run companies not fully-private operated companies are always the ideal for certain activities.
Yes, I did try various wordings before I came to those two, which I wasn't entirely satisfied with precisely because they don't cater for the mixed market that operates in several sectors. But then neither did the original wording.
FWIW, I think that state-owned Quangos can do all sorts of humdrum routine stuff very well - track maintenance for Network Rail, for example, providing they're properly funded. On the other hand, neither BR nor Network Rail were likely to invest the money in station improvement that Railtrack did, which improved customer experience no end. Once the public takes an interest in something though, whether as a taxpayer or a customer, there needs to be much closer accountability, either through genuine competition or through direct government accountability.
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?
No, because TM ended up being the only option and thus avoided being found out as an electoral disaster.
I don't think that's true. She was up against an Andrea Leadsom whose campaign was already holed beneath the water when she withdrew and who was (and is) far more capable of saying something particularly stupid. Against that, all May needed to do was not make any mistakes and spout platitudes and she'd have been fine.
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.
The UK might then belatedly look around. It will note that Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, Germany and Japan, who are all more modest about their place in the world - the last two out of necessity - have become about 30% richer than us since the Second World War (GDP per capita, PPP).
1945 - the near-bankruptcy of the UK 1950s and 1960s - the dismantling of the Empire 1960 - the UK formed EFTA, having made half baked efforts to join the pre-Treaty of Rome discussions 1973 - the UK dumped EFTA and joined the EEC; it saw its future as part of a United Europe 2016-19 -------- [complete as applicable].
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.
eir 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've been having similar thoughts.
Moreover, looking at the latest economic stats, car sales, construction, it seems like we might finally be heading into that Brexit Recession. Project Fear might be coming true - belatedly.
That alters things.
I don't think we will revoke A50, but I can see the UK pleading to join EEA/EFTA come 2019. And our pleas will probably be accepted.
No controls on immigration will mean a UKIP comeback. That guarantees a Corbyn government.
The fall in the £ and the coming slowdown/recession is killing off the immigration debate, anyway. The numbers are dropping fast.
.
Bit the areas of the country that list immigration as a problem are areas that have the lowest levels of immigration in the country.
It's not about actual levels of immigration, it is about perceived levels of immigration.
I think there is a good chance that in the short term yesterday will improve her poll ratings as people sympathise with her human plight. I think the Nuremburg rally style triumphalism of the Corbynistas will do Labour more harm.
However it remains true that Tories will not want May to lead them into the next election because as an embitterered Thatcher said in 1990 after her MPs sacked her "Its a funny old world".
Godwin before lunch? Really?
Who is Godwin to make laws without consent? He must be a EU Commissioner. Antisemitism. Rows and rows of fanatics worshipping the Leader, chanting mindlessly. Nuremburg Rally seems the right analogy regardless of Commissioner Godwin.
My view: the demographics facts combined with the political fallout of Brexit mean that we're probably 80%+ certain to lose the next GE whatever.
So, I want the most technically competent and resilient PM possible to steer us through and out the other side.
We'll then have to pick up whatever mess Corbyn/McDonnell makes and fix that thereafter, hopefully after only 5 years, but it might be 10 years sadly.
That for me gives two choices to replace TM: Jeremy Hunt, and Michael Gove.
No, neither are popular. But I think we're past that now. The Tories best hope is competence.
I agree that May should go. She's uninspiring, lacking in ambition and just unlucky - I have always been a bit MEH about her. In the modern era you need someone who can project warmth and emotional intelligence and she has neither. David Davies and Boris would both be better chairpeople, fronting the govt.
But I disagree on Corbyn. If Labour reached a GE with a realistic chance of winning under Corbyn their vote would nosedive. I genuinely don't think anybody - other than a handful of left wing nihilists - want him and McDonnell running the country. I'd bet my house on it he'll never ever be PM of the UK.
It's always a bad idea to bet on what you wish was true.
I agree -Corbyn will never be prime minister. There are copious Corbynista tears to come.
Comments
The question would be better worded as 'owned and run by the government', or 'owned and run by private companies'.
If the Tories have a leadership election, there will not be a deal at all.
TWAT.
edit/ But you are right, they weren't really "renewed" in any meaningful sense, as the subsequent sorry trail of events amply demonstrated.
N O
From 24/6/16, there should have been an inclusive negotiating process involving, whisper it quietly, even people on the REMAIN side, to try and build a national concensus around our objectives from the A50 process before said process was invoked.
Instead, we had months of indecision and waffle followed by a pointless, time-consuming and futile General Election. I still don't know what the British Government wants and I'm not convinced or impressed by platitudes from the likes of May, Hammond and Davis.
Tory rebels have said that there is a "50/50" chance they will confront Theresa May in the next three days and demand that she steps down before the end of the year.
Ed Vaizey, a former minister, today became the first Tory MP to break ranks and said that "quite a few people are firmly of the view that she should resign" after her disastrous conference speech.
The Telegraph understands that the rebels, who have the support of around 30 Tory MPs, believe there is a "small window of opportunity" to force the Prime Minister out.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/05/exclusive-tory-rebels-say-5050-chance-will-tell-theresa-may/
This is high stakes political poker played as Russian roulette with the economy in the gun barrel.
Ok, tortured metaphor, but you get the point.
You can guess some of them
Vaizey
Morgan
Soubry
The wets on the move?
As Stephen Bush has been saying, the breakdowns of the YouGov poll last week suggested the oldies are more supportive of nationalisation than younger voters are: my suspicion is this is because a lot of younger people don't really know what nationalisation is but maybe have a vague memory of learning that the Soviet Union did it, and so automatically assume it would be a bad thing.
And 30 MPs isn't enough. They need about 50.
I think neither fully-Government run companies not fully-private operated companies are always the ideal for certain activities.
Spend it
A recession is perfect for forcing the British workforce and the boss class to address some of the endemic ills we have become so angry about, these past 40 years.
Huzzah!
On topic, I am in the she can't go camp. At this point, to waste any time whatsoever on a leadership election would be a gross dereliction of the duty the government owes the country. (Cue resignation announcement.)
https://twitter.com/GazWeetman/status/915827515335245824
Oh, wait...
Don't listen to anything that idiot says.
She may or may not go but Osborne knows bugger all...
Or Navy these days.
LOL
Mind you if he's been advising her might explain some stuff.
Think is was around 6th October 2007 when he chickened out of having an election?
As the FTSE heads back toward another all-time high, I do wonder why people are worried. If you have cash, stick it into non-British FTSE companies and as the pound falls and the price rises, cash out as and when you want.
FTSE at 8500 by the end of the year ?
At the least you have some time if you wish to rearrange your affairs.
Gets coat....
FWIW, I think that state-owned Quangos can do all sorts of humdrum routine stuff very well - track maintenance for Network Rail, for example, providing they're properly funded. On the other hand, neither BR nor Network Rail were likely to invest the money in station improvement that Railtrack did, which improved customer experience no end. Once the public takes an interest in something though, whether as a taxpayer or a customer, there needs to be much closer accountability, either through genuine competition or through direct government accountability.
1945 - the near-bankruptcy of the UK
1950s and 1960s - the dismantling of the Empire
1960 - the UK formed EFTA, having made half baked efforts to join the pre-Treaty of Rome discussions
1973 - the UK dumped EFTA and joined the EEC; it saw its future as part of a United Europe
2016-19 -------- [complete as applicable].
It's not about actual levels of immigration, it is about perceived levels of immigration.