Mr. Observer, how else could a referendum have been run? With an Irish Republic veto?
Of course not. I am merely pointing out that just as the British may not be happy for the Irish to seek to overturn a British referendum result, the Irish have every reason to be pissed off that the British have effectively overridden an Irish referendum result.
FF43 you asked me about our longer term investment plans after brexit last night. I have thought about the answer. As a high tech manufacturer in the global healthcare supply chain we are less and less dependent on Nhs. The uk may be an attractive place to invest after brexit but only if the uk government provides strong incentives to us. The reality is that I don't see it having the money or the willpower to do so. As such we will most likely slowly transfer new investment to the rest of the EU. In the end the UK will have to fight for our investment not rely on it.
I feel brexiters don't really understand that they need to prove to business that they will look after them post brexit not just assume we will be there.
Thanks, HA. The incentives companies like yours would be looking for are essentially money, to overcome the additional costs of doing business after Brexit? Markets are what they are and you expect to manage regardless of the UK partially or substantially withdrawing from its internationally integrated market? (I am interpreting here ...)
This looks like an environment for business transfer abroad by acquisition. Company with plant in the EU acquires UK company and merges UK operations with their EU ones. Question is whether we can come up with new business at a replacement rate. I am not sanguine.
In that spirit, Conservatives are not handling Corbyn at all well. Current attitudes remind me of certain Labour attitudes towards Cameron in the late 00s. Remember that Gene Hunt poster.
Yes, I think they haven't yet got the right angle. Broadly they should be focusing more on the unworkabilty of his positions rather than the IRA/Hamas/Stalin/Marxist attacks (justified though the latter undoubtedly are).
More specifically they should be targeting different messages at different segments. They can run the IRA/Hamas/Stalin/Marxist stuff at older voters, most of whom will be extremely receptive to it. They should keep well away from that angle on any media aimed at younger voters, for whom 'Well-meaning guy, but hopeless in practice' should be the message, backed up by concrete examples of how they would be impacted by Corbynomics.
Of course, to get this right requires someone with a really good political sense for what works. That's a bit of a problem at the moment..
The problem the Conservatives have is that they think the facts speak for themselves, whereas actually you have to continually explain and rebut socialism because its rhetoric is always going to sound good, and looks more attractive on paper.
This could be a significant moment in the ongoing Trump/Russia case... Flynn's lawyers no longer cooperating with Trump's:
"the notification led Mr. Trump’s lawyers to believe that Mr. Flynn — who, along with his son, is seen as having significant criminal exposure — has, at the least, begun discussions with Mr. Mueller about cooperating."
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
Some journos now predicting Ireland is the rock upon which Brexit will founder
Were they the same journos predicting May would be out within weeks?
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Remarkably, though, some of her possible successors have continued to contaminate themselves, whilst she seems to have got a grip in the last month.
Is Brexit red mist clouding the Remainiac Alastair Campbell’s judgement? Tony Blair’s aggressive former spin doctor went a bit Ukip at the Labour Leaver Gisela Stuart before the pair appeared on BBC One’s Sunday Politics. “When are you going to stop fucking up my country?” growled raging Ali. “It’s my country, too,” shot back the upset German-born Stuart, the Birmingham Edgbaston MP for two decades until quitting last June.
Campbell’s second verbal punch – “You’ve got another country to go to” – was so below the belt that, aimed by a Brextremist at a Stayer, might have had the snarling rottie denouncing xenophobia. Stuart has lived in Britain since 1974. Standing for Labour with the surname of her Bavarian parents, Gschaider, she was unsuccessful in the 1994 European elections. Three years later, under the Stuart name of her first husband, she won Edgbaston in Labour’s 1997 landslide. She never expected a loyalty test from a Labour Remainiac.
Mr. Observer, how else could a referendum have been run? With an Irish Republic veto?
Of course not. I am merely pointing out that just as the British may not be happy for the Irish to seek to overturn a British referendum result, the Irish have every reason to be pissed off that the British have effectively overridden an Irish referendum result.
? Which referendum result is the UK overriding ?
The referendum the Irish had in which they endorsed the Good Friday Agreement and accepted changes to their constitution on the back of it. The GFA assumes ongoing UK membership of the EU (and the European Convention on Human Rights).
FF43 you asked me about our longer term investment plans after brexit last night. I have thought about the answer. As a high tech manufacturer in the global healthcare supply chain we are less and less dependent on Nhs. The uk may be an attractive place to invest after brexit but only if the uk government provides strong incentives to us. The reality is that I don't see it having the money or the willpower to do so. As such we will most likely slowly transfer new investment to the rest of the EU. In the end the UK will have to fight for our investment not rely on it.
I feel brexiters don't really understand that they need to prove to business that they will look after them post brexit not just assume we will be there.
I expect that to be forthcoming. But the Government can't be specific about it yet, because the EU will either require us to close down such measures in the negotiations - or try and demand additional exit fees, aimed at reducing the cash available to make that assistance to business.
Why should we believe the government WILL now come up with measures to help business when they haven't before, when many, but not all, of these measures were doable before? This isn't a rhetorical question. Several PB posters nodded their head in response to your assertion.
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
If we leave the EU without an agreement it will not go well for the UK or the government that has to deal with the consequences.
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
If we leave the EU without an agreement it will not go well for the UK or the government that has to deal with the consequences.
In that spirit, Conservatives are not handling Corbyn at all well. Current attitudes remind me of certain Labour attitudes towards Cameron in the late 00s. Remember that Gene Hunt poster.
They should keep well away from that angle on any media aimed at younger voters, for whom 'Well-meaning guy, but hopeless in practice' should be the message
Tories will find it hard to run on that because it's wrong for two reasons.
(1) Corbyn has proven pretty effective as leader of the Labour party and opposition, overcoming some pretty stiff resistance in the early days. He is pretty tough, with even tougher people behind him.
(2) The Tories have their own issues of competence to deal with. No-one in the current cabinet can run on competence. No-one can run on pragmatism. On the key issue Brexit, Corbyn is more pragmatic than most.
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
If we leave the EU without an agreement it will not go well for the UK or the government that has to deal with the consequences.
Wont go well for the EU either - some specific interest groups will face a catastrophic end.
Mr Meeks and others are asking us to accept that knowing deceit is a perfectly acceptable part of public discourse. It's a good example of how the EU has corrupted politics in its various member states, although less blatant than the enactment of the Lisbon Treaty over the heads of France and the Netherlands after they rejected the constitution.
Juncker: yes "great", no "we continue".
"There can be no democratic choice against the European treaties."
FF43 you asked me about our longer term investment plans after brexit last night. I have thought about the answer. As a high tech manufacturer in the global healthcare supply chain we are less and less dependent on Nhs. The uk may be an attractive place to invest after brexit but only if the uk government provides strong incentives to us. The reality is that I don't see it having the money or the willpower to do so. As such we will most likely slowly transfer new investment to the rest of the EU. In the end the UK will have to fight for our investment not rely on it.
I feel brexiters don't really understand that they need to prove to business that they will look after them post brexit not just assume we will be there.
I expect that to be forthcoming. But the Government can't be specific about it yet, because the EU will either require us to close down such measures in the negotiations - or try and demand additional exit fees, aimed at reducing the cash available to make that assistance to business.
Why should we believe the government WILL now come up with measures to help business when they haven't before, when many, but not all, of these measures were doable before? This isn't a rhetorical question. Several PB posters nodded their head in response to your assertion.
The Government are taking corporation tax down to 17% in 2019. That measure in itself is a big incentive to all businesses large and small
I'm sure the British public would be delighted at the prospect of the Irish Republic vetoing a British referendum result.
Another one to file under 'Ain't gonna happen'.
Well, the UK has effectively overridden an Irish referendum result.
The GFA as a long-term solution had all sorts of flaws. It's both undemocratic and, consequently, unworkable for a treaty to bind an electorate for all time if the electorate wants to do something that conflicts with it, and which would normally be within its rights.
As for Ireland dropping its claim to the territory of another state, that was long overdue.
In that spirit, Conservatives are not handling Corbyn at all well. Current attitudes remind me of certain Labour attitudes towards Cameron in the late 00s. Remember that Gene Hunt poster.
Yes, I think they haven't yet got the right angle. Broadly they should be focusing more on the unworkabilty of his positions rather than the IRA/Hamas/Stalin/Marxist attacks (justified though the latter undoubtedly are).
More specifically they should be targeting different messages at different segments. They can run the IRA/Hamas/Stalin/Marxist stuff at older voters, most of whom will be extremely receptive to it. They should keep well away from that angle on any media aimed at younger voters, for whom 'Well-meaning guy, but hopeless in practice' should be the message, backed up by concrete examples of how they would be impacted by Corbynomics.
Of course, to get this right requires someone with a really good political sense for what works. That's a bit of a problem at the moment..
I think this would be an improvement. My generation does put a lot of importance on competence.
But it's not enough. To brutally butcher a metaphor, if you're a sheep and you have to decide who'll be preparing dinner- a wolf or another sheep- then how competent they are at cooking won't be your main concern. The conservatives have to persuade people that they have their interests at heart in the first place
Mr. Observer, how else could a referendum have been run? With an Irish Republic veto?
Of course not. I am merely pointing out that just as the British may not be happy for the Irish to seek to overturn a British referendum result, the Irish have every reason to be pissed off that the British have effectively overridden an Irish referendum result.
? Which referendum result is the UK overriding ?
The referendum the Irish had in which they endorsed the Good Friday Agreement and accepted changes to their constitution on the back of it. The GFA assumes ongoing UK membership of the EU (and the European Convention on Human Rights).
Because that was considered to be the settled status quo at the time. And it was pre-Amsterdam/ Nice/ Constitution/ Lisbon, by the way.
It doesn't (and couldn't) bind the UK electorate in perpetuity.
I'm sure the British public would be delighted at the prospect of the Irish Republic vetoing a British referendum result.
Another one to file under 'Ain't gonna happen'.
Well, the UK has effectively overridden an Irish referendum result.
The GFA as a long-term solution had all sorts of flaws. It's both undemocratic and, consequently, unworkable for a treaty to bind an electorate for all time if the electorate wants to do something that conflicts with it, and which would normally be within its rights.
As for Ireland dropping its claim to the territory of another state, that was long overdue.
None of which gets us round the fact that the Brexit referendum effectively overrode the results of the Irish GFA referendum.
As usual Stephen Bush in the New Statesman gets to the heart of it:
Far from being a gamble, the political calculation for Varadkar is simple: unless the British government changes its Brexit objectives there is going to be economic damage to his country, but he can avoid the political damage to his career if he carries on the way he's going. The ham-fisted briefing and the poor approach to winning hearts and minds outside of the United Kingdom by the British government has only made that calculation easier.
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
If we leave the EU without an agreement it will not go well for the UK or the government that has to deal with the consequences.
You cannot know that
There are all sorts of choices the outcome of which cannot be known for certain in advance, but are nevertheless extremely foolish to try.
Just wanted to highlight this - older posters may recall the pilot programme we ran over the last 3-4 years, but we launched the Fore formally last night
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Is anyone on here laying bets on how long she would survive a no deal Brexit (despite being her preferred choice) ?
She won't be allowed to fight the next election whatever happens with Brexit. I had that from a well-informed MP this last fortnight.
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
Mr. Observer, how else could a referendum have been run? With an Irish Republic veto?
Of course not. I am merely pointing out that just as the British may not be happy for the Irish to seek to overturn a British referendum result, the Irish have every reason to be pissed off that the British have effectively overridden an Irish referendum result.
? Which referendum result is the UK overriding ?
The referendum the Irish had in which they endorsed the Good Friday Agreement and accepted changes to their constitution on the back of it. The GFA assumes ongoing UK membership of the EU (and the European Convention on Human Rights).
Because that was considered to be the settled status quo at the time. And it was pre-Amsterdam/ Nice/ Constitution/ Lisbon, by the way.
It doesn't (and couldn't) bind the UK electorate in perpetuity.
In that spirit, Conservatives are not handling Corbyn at all well. Current attitudes remind me of certain Labour attitudes towards Cameron in the late 00s. Remember that Gene Hunt poster.
They should keep well away from that angle on any media aimed at younger voters, for whom 'Well-meaning guy, but hopeless in practice' should be the message
Tories will find it hard to run on that because it's wrong for two reasons.
(1) Corbyn has proven pretty effective as leader of the Labour party and opposition, overcoming some pretty stiff resistance in the early days. He is pretty tough, with even tougher people behind him.
(2) The Tories have their own issues of competence to deal with. No-one in the current cabinet can run on competence. No-one can run on pragmatism. On the key issue Brexit, Corbyn is more pragmatic than most.
Theresa May is extremely pragmatic. It's just that that pragmatism is entirely directed towards her own career rather than her country or party
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Is anyone on here laying bets on how long she would survive a no deal Brexit (despite being her preferred choice) ?
She won't be allowed to fight the next election whatever happens with Brexit. I had that from a well-informed MP this last fortnight.
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
If we leave the EU without an agreement it will not go well for the UK or the government that has to deal with the consequences.
Wont go well for the EU either - some specific interest groups will face a catastrophic end.
Yep - but that is unlikely to be a winning argument for the UK government dealing with the consequences of a No Deal Brexit.
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
If we leave the EU without an agreement it will not go well for the UK or the government that has to deal with the consequences.
You cannot know that
Of course - just imagine everything I say having "In my opinion" either at the front or back end!
His saracastic, mocking tone does indeed imply that young people are ‘idiots’, as well as his assertion young voters believed Corbyn would stop Brexit. Corbyn’s voters did not vote for him believing that he’d stop Brexit, and to imply they did, is to imply that his voters didn’t listen to anything he said. I’ve long been a critic of Labour’s Brexit policy, I likened it to the Schodinger’s Cat theory earlier on this week, but Cleverly’s implication that young voters expected Corbyn to stop Brexit is deeply disingenuous. It’s similar to the implication that Corbyn’s voters thought he would write off student debt, when the polling found only 17% of people actually believed this.
There are multiple factors, even within single individuals. So it's not at all unreasonable to make the point that some of the Labour vote was attracted by the belief or hope that Labour would stop or at least soften Brexit, and that some of it was attracted by a view that Corbyn would write off student debt. The Conservatives should have been much more on the ball in unpicking each of the contradictions in Labour's messaging and policies.
A percent here, a percent there, makes the difference between winning or not winning a majority.
He implied a whole group of people thought the same thing, without much in the way to actually suggest this was the case. Re a Soft Brexit, he didn’t actually assert that voters believed that - he asserted that voters literally thought Corbyn would stop Brexit, which is a different thing. Likewise, it was asserted previously in the summer that Corbyn’s young voters collectively all thought he was going to write off student debt (even I was guilty of this) - the fact that the polling suggests otherwise, indicates that such an assumption was unfair. Conservatives should not believe that showing voters that Corbyn isn’t a hardcore Remainer or that he wasn’t going to write off student debt will win them votes. They tried the latter shortly after the GE, and it has not impacted Labour’s VI with either YouGov or Survation.
If anyone has any doubt about TM determination catch up on her frosty glare at Tusk when he grabs her hand. If looks could kill as the expression goes.
I think the remainers are about to collide with democracy as TM delivers her offer enveloppe in good will but is quite prepared to end talks if the EU reject it and i might add, would receive big backing in the Country .
The greatest shame is that David Cameron didn't do it earlier
The country is split. A UK walkout of the Brexit talks may see the Tories win a small overall majority on the back of a Red, White and Blue election. Then the Tories would have to deal with the consequences of a walkout. That may not go so well for them.
To be fair to you, you do say it may not go so well for them but that leaves the possibility it could go well which should be the preferred outcome for everyone
If we leave the EU without an agreement it will not go well for the UK or the government that has to deal with the consequences.
You cannot know that
Of course - just imagine everything I say having "In my opinion" either at the front or back end!
Labour didn't have a good Budget. No workable answer to "so, what would you do instead?" If only they had been grilled on that in the GE election, rather than getting a free ride...
Labour needs a better Shadow Chancellor. Reshufle time, if they are serious about power.
But are any of Corbyn’s friends better with numbers though? I’m not sure any of them can add up.
Casting doubt on politicians' basic arithmetic skills seems a bit childish. But if you are going to play that game, how do you explain that someone who is highly numerate supports Labour?
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Is anyone on here laying bets on how long she would survive a no deal Brexit (despite being her preferred choice) ?
She won't be allowed to fight the next election whatever happens with Brexit. I had that from a well-informed MP this last fortnight.
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
I don't think this is quite right. Having seen off the EU would win her support. eg Margaret Thatcher's budget rebate. Getting what's perceived to be a good deal in the circumstances is what she needs. No deal doesn't work for her.
As an aside, Theresa May is motivated only by her survival, which is why she is such an unappealing PM.
Is Brexit red mist clouding the Remainiac Alastair Campbell’s judgement? Tony Blair’s aggressive former spin doctor went a bit Ukip at the Labour Leaver Gisela Stuart before the pair appeared on BBC One’s Sunday Politics. “When are you going to stop fucking up my country?” growled raging Ali. “It’s my country, too,” shot back the upset German-born Stuart, the Birmingham Edgbaston MP for two decades until quitting last June.
Campbell’s second verbal punch – “You’ve got another country to go to” – was so below the belt that, aimed by a Brextremist at a Stayer, might have had the snarling rottie denouncing xenophobia. Stuart has lived in Britain since 1974. Standing for Labour with the surname of her Bavarian parents, Gschaider, she was unsuccessful in the 1994 European elections. Three years later, under the Stuart name of her first husband, she won Edgbaston in Labour’s 1997 landslide. She never expected a loyalty test from a Labour Remainiac.
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Is anyone on here laying bets on how long she would survive a no deal Brexit (despite being her preferred choice) ?
She won't be allowed to fight the next election whatever happens with Brexit. I had that from a well-informed MP this last fortnight.
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
And then what?
And then it will be less popular. but opinion'll depend mainly on who's held to be to blame for the breakdown in talks, and that blame will probably be split more-or-less along preconceived lines.
Labour didn't have a good Budget. No workable answer to "so, what would you do instead?" If only they had been grilled on that in the GE election, rather than getting a free ride...
Labour needs a better Shadow Chancellor. Reshufle time, if they are serious about power.
But are any of Corbyn’s friends better with numbers though? I’m not sure any of them can add up.
Casting doubt on politicians' basic arithmetic skills seems a bit childish. But if you are going to play that game, how do you explain that someone who is highly numerate supports Labour?
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Is anyone on here laying bets on how long she would survive a no deal Brexit (despite being her preferred choice) ?
She won't be allowed to fight the next election whatever happens with Brexit. I had that from a well-informed MP this last fortnight.
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
Just wanted to highlight this - older posters may recall the pilot programme we ran over the last 3-4 years, but we launched the Fore formally last night
Now this is something a Labour politician has actually said, that makes them look bad that the Tories could’ve used. The most damaging part isn’t the Marxist part incidentally, but that McDonnell literally waited for the financial crash to happen:
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Is anyone on here laying bets on how long she would survive a no deal Brexit (despite being her preferred choice) ?
She won't be allowed to fight the next election whatever happens with Brexit. I had that from a well-informed MP this last fortnight.
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
I don't think this is quite right. Having seen off the EU would win her support. eg Margaret Thatcher's budget rebate. Getting what's perceived to be a good deal in the circumstances is what she needs. No deal doesn't work for her.
As an aside, Theresa May is motivated only by her survival, which is why she is such an unappealing PM.
Like I say, this is Theresa May's final term whatever happens with Brexit.
I completely agree that both she and the country need a good deal. What's not obvious is whether that's available. We're much more likely to be faced with the choice of no deal or bad deal.
Is Brexit red mist clouding the Remainiac Alastair Campbell’s judgement? Tony Blair’s aggressive former spin doctor went a bit Ukip at the Labour Leaver Gisela Stuart before the pair appeared on BBC One’s Sunday Politics. “When are you going to stop fucking up my country?” growled raging Ali. “It’s my country, too,” shot back the upset German-born Stuart, the Birmingham Edgbaston MP for two decades until quitting last June.
Campbell’s second verbal punch – “You’ve got another country to go to” – was so below the belt that, aimed by a Brextremist at a Stayer, might have had the snarling rottie denouncing xenophobia. Stuart has lived in Britain since 1974. Standing for Labour with the surname of her Bavarian parents, Gschaider, she was unsuccessful in the 1994 European elections. Three years later, under the Stuart name of her first husband, she won Edgbaston in Labour’s 1997 landslide. She never expected a loyalty test from a Labour Remainiac.
That is a very nasty retort from Campbell. Farage would be crucified if he had said something like that.
Campbell is a very nasty piece of work. No doubt behaviours worsened by his alcoholism and mental health issues.
But, that's not news.
I thought he has been dry and sane for years (? decades).
I agree always a nasty piece of work, but no excuses.
Campbell is clever, decisive, ruthless, loyal and pithy with words. And someone who viscerally hates Tories to the point where he is blinded by it.
I reckon he went to London as a clever, provincial thug to push the posh and polite political wonks about. And he did that in spades, making a remarkable career out of it.
Now this is something a Labour politician has actually said, that makes them look bad that the Tories could’ve used. The most damaging part isn’t the Marxist part incidentally, but that McDonnell literally waited for the financial crash to happen:
Capitalism does have periodic crises, as Marx pointed out. Indeed the business cycle is fairly uncontroversial, but the timing of the next recession is not very easy to forecast. John did have to wait a generation.
The amplitude and wavelength of boom does tend to amplify the same features in bust.
In normal circumstances Theresa would have resigned within hours. What saved her is that none of her possible successors fancied being PM while Brexit was ongoing, so they kept Theresa in place to absorb the contamination.
Is anyone on here laying bets on how long she would survive a no deal Brexit (despite being her preferred choice) ?
She won't be allowed to fight the next election whatever happens with Brexit. I had that from a well-informed MP this last fortnight.
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
I don't think this is quite right. Having seen off the EU would win her support. eg Margaret Thatcher's budget rebate. Getting what's perceived to be a good deal in the circumstances is what she needs. No deal doesn't work for her.
As an aside, Theresa May is motivated only by her survival, which is why she is such an unappealing PM.
Like I say, this is Theresa May's final term whatever happens with Brexit.
I completely agree that both she and the country need a good deal. What's not obvious is whether that's available. We're much more likely to be faced with the choice of no deal or bad deal.
Or no Brexit.
No deal is better than a bad deal for the EU. Eurosceptics who voted for Brexit bit off more than they could chew.
Now this is something a Labour politician has actually said, that makes them look bad that the Tories could’ve used. The most damaging part isn’t the Marxist part incidentally, but that McDonnell literally waited for the financial crash to happen:
Capitalism does have periodic crises, as Marx pointed out. Indeed the business cycle is fairly uncontroversial, but the timing of the next recession is not very easy to forecast. John did have to wait a generation.
The amplitude and wavelength of boom does tend to amplify the same features in bust.
I’m not denying that the economic cycle exists. But to say you literally waited for a financial crash to happen, as if you were willingly it on simply to prove a point doesn’t sound great.
Now this is something a Labour politician has actually said, that makes them look bad that the Tories could’ve used. The most damaging part isn’t the Marxist part incidentally, but that McDonnell literally waited for the financial crash to happen:
Capitalism does have periodic crises, as Marx pointed out. Indeed the business cycle is fairly uncontroversial, but the timing of the next recession is not very easy to forecast. John did have to wait a generation.
The amplitude and wavelength of boom does tend to amplify the same features in bust.
I’m not denying that the economic cycle exists. But to say you literally waited for a financial crash to happen, as if you were willingly it on simply to prove a point doesn’t sound great.
Ain't gonna happen because the EU27 have a united position behind Ireland.
The anger stage will pass, Richard.
Their unified position is identical to the UK one, but bizarrely manifests itself as an apparent willingness to veto their own objective. It's the weirdest position I've ever seen, but, even if they persist with the lunacy, it would derail a Brexit deal, not Brexit, as David H has already pointed out.
Actually Ireland don't have a veto over a Brexit deal as a50 only requires a qualified majority. You can bet that if the UK did slap a pile of cash on the table Ireland's objections would be forgotten in about five seconds. That is the trouble when you are a small country in the EU - you convince yourself you matter but you are deluding yourself.
Ain't gonna happen because the EU27 have a united position behind Ireland.
The anger stage will pass, Richard.
Their unified position is identical to the UK one, but bizarrely manifests itself as an apparent willingness to veto their own objective. It's the weirdest position I've ever seen, but, even if they persist with the lunacy, it would derail a Brexit deal, not Brexit, as David H has already pointed out.
Actually Ireland don't have a veto over a Brexit deal as a50 only requires a qualified majority. You can bet that if the UK did slap a pile of cash on the table Ireland's objections would be forgotten in about five seconds. That is the trouble when you are a small country in the EU - you convince yourself you matter but you are deluding yourself.
While A50 is a QMV issue, a trade deal requires unanimity.
In practice the EU27 have acted with total solidarity, so the distinction is unimportant.
Ain't gonna happen because the EU27 have a united position behind Ireland.
The anger stage will pass, Richard.
Their unified position is identical to the UK one, but bizarrely manifests itself as an apparent willingness to veto their own objective. It's the weirdest position I've ever seen, but, even if they persist with the lunacy, it would derail a Brexit deal, not Brexit, as David H has already pointed out.
Actually Ireland don't have a veto over a Brexit deal as a50 only requires a qualified majority. You can bet that if the UK did slap a pile of cash on the table Ireland's objections would be forgotten in about five seconds. That is the trouble when you are a small country in the EU - you convince yourself you matter but you are deluding yourself.
While A50 is a QMV issue, a trade deal requires unanimity.
In practice the EU27 have acted with total solidarity, so the distinction is unimportant.
That does depend on whether the trade deal forms part of the A50 deal.
While that might sound optimistic - and certainly a completed deal won't be done by March 2019 - the A50 deal could include the creation of a framework for a trade deal, including a QMV mechanism for ratification.
As you say though, if the 27 are going to act as one then it really doesn't much matter.
Comments
This looks like an environment for business transfer abroad by acquisition. Company with plant in the EU acquires UK company and merges UK operations with their EU ones. Question is whether we can come up with new business at a replacement rate. I am not sanguine.
Flynn's lawyers no longer cooperating with Trump's:
"the notification led Mr. Trump’s lawyers to believe that Mr. Flynn — who, along with his son, is seen as having significant criminal exposure — has, at the least, begun discussions with Mr. Mueller about cooperating."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/23/us/politics/flynn-mueller-russia-trump.html
But, that's not news.
(1) Corbyn has proven pretty effective as leader of the Labour party and opposition, overcoming some pretty stiff resistance in the early days. He is pretty tough, with even tougher people behind him.
(2) The Tories have their own issues of competence to deal with. No-one in the current cabinet can run on competence. No-one can run on pragmatism. On the key issue Brexit, Corbyn is more pragmatic than most.
Brexit has winners as well as losers. The main winners are bureaucrats and jobsworths.
"There can be no democratic choice against the European treaties."
As for Ireland dropping its claim to the territory of another state, that was long overdue.
CDU/CSU-EPP: 32% ↑
SPD-S&D: 21%
AfD-EFDD: 12% ↓
FDP-ALDE: 12% ↑
LINKE-LEFT: 10% ↓
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 10%
Germany, Civey poll:
CDU/CSU-EPP: 29%
SPD-S&D: 19% ↓
FDP-ALDE: 14%
AfD-EFDD: 13%
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 12%
LINKE-LEFT: 9%
But it's not enough. To brutally butcher a metaphor, if you're a sheep and you have to decide who'll be preparing dinner- a wolf or another sheep- then how competent they are at cooking won't be your main concern. The conservatives have to persuade people that they have their interests at heart in the first place
It doesn't (and couldn't) bind the UK electorate in perpetuity.
As usual Stephen Bush in the New Statesman gets to the heart of it:
Far from being a gamble, the political calculation for Varadkar is simple: unless the British government changes its Brexit objectives there is going to be economic damage to his country, but he can avoid the political damage to his career if he carries on the way he's going. The ham-fisted briefing and the poor approach to winning hearts and minds outside of the United Kingdom by the British government has only made that calculation easier.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/11/time-running-out-theresa-may-address-irish-brexit-problem
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/city-talent-can-help-galvanise-charities-and-transform-lives-a3701026.html
In the short term, a no deal Brexit would gain her support, in the Party, among MPs and in the country. Standing up to the EU always does.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/stephen-hawking-jeremy-corbyn-labour-theresa-may-conservatives-endorsement-general-election-a7774016.html
As an aside, Theresa May is motivated only by her survival, which is why she is such an unappealing PM.
I agree always a nasty piece of work, but no excuses.
Brilliant point. Well made.
https://youtu.be/OzeDZtx3wUw
https://twitter.com/amandeepbhogal/status/933302760354861057
I completely agree that both she and the country need a good deal. What's not obvious is whether that's available. We're much more likely to be faced with the choice of no deal or bad deal.
I reckon he went to London as a clever, provincial thug to push the posh and polite political wonks about. And he did that in spades, making a remarkable career out of it.
NEW THREAD
The amplitude and wavelength of boom does tend to amplify the same features in bust.
No deal is better than a bad deal for the EU. Eurosceptics who voted for Brexit bit off more than they could chew.
In practice the EU27 have acted with total solidarity, so the distinction is unimportant.
While that might sound optimistic - and certainly a completed deal won't be done by March 2019 - the A50 deal could include the creation of a framework for a trade deal, including a QMV mechanism for ratification.
As you say though, if the 27 are going to act as one then it really doesn't much matter.