It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.
Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
After we leave? Nope. Payments will be hard and fast treaty obligations for us, regardless of what we else agree after we leave. The EU can apply sanctions against us.
Yep - if we want a transition deal, we will need to sign on the dotted line.
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.
Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.
Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
Soft and bouncy Brexit here we come :-D
But Brexit.
Whatever. Who cares? It certainly will not be the Brexit promised and championed by the Tory right. Given where I thought we were heading a few months ago, that is good enough for me. It's not ideal, but it could have been so much worse.
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
After we leave? Nope. Payments will be hard and fast treaty obligations for us, regardless of what we else agree after we leave. The EU can apply sanctions against us.
If what you say is true, then it would be electoral suicide for TMay to sign up to that (once it was widely understood).
"Labour’s real problem is that it is failing to have a clear distinctive voice that resonates with the vast numbers of Labour voters who are strongly for remain."
In your eyes, Mike. In reality if Labour jumped that way they would lose a chunk of Leave voters in seats like Don Valley.
Facing both ways at once seems to be pretty sensible short-term tactics (and was the key reason they did so well in June). Of course, the Lib Dems' experience shows us the long-term perils of this approach.
Exactly, I'm no fan of Corbyn but I have to admit his ambivalence on this issue is something of a masterstroke. Leavers are a small minority in the PLP and membership but a much larger one among Labour voters. He's keeping them on board without alienating hardcore Remainers, some of whom, judging by my adventures on social media, genuinely believe he's going to stop Brexit.
That might have been tenable over an election campaign, but over a whole parliament (where you are also constantly critiquing the government's handling of Brexit) conspicuously having no policy of your own to offer as an alternative makes you look mendacious, incompetent, or both. Which doesn't make you seem any kind of improvement on the government you're trying to dislodge.
+1 for this. In the long term, Corbyn's ambivalence may turn out to be his Achilles heel. Brexit seems to be the dividing line in today's political world and unlike the Conservatives who are, for now, the pro Brexit party, Corbyn faces the unenviable task of squaring the circle between a fanatically pro EU youngish, Momentumite vote, and keeping the traditional WWC Labour vote on side.
His ambivalence worked at GE2017 because of the old maxim of never interrupt your enemies when they are making a mistake - Labour's position simply wasn't scrutinised, a vote for them was a 'free shot' against the government of the day. That position becomes more and more untenable as time goes by. Those who sit on fences are sometimes impaled on them...
Then again, they would say that, wouldn't they? Only 3 are prepared to put their heads above the parapet, and that ignores the effect of Labour Leave MPs.
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.
Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
Soft and bouncy Brexit here we come :-D
But Brexit.
Whatever. Who cares? It certainly will not be the Brexit promised and championed by the Tory right. Given where I thought we were heading a few months ago, that is good enough for me. It's not ideal, but it could have been so much worse.
Until Leave voters notice that nothing has changed.
Then again, they would say that, wouldn't they? Only 3 are prepared to put their heads above the parapet, and that ignores the effect of Labour Leave MPs.
As the implications of the phase 1 agreement sink in, you might find some of the Brexit hardliners move into the rebel column.
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.
Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
Soft and bouncy Brexit here we come :-D
But Brexit.
Whatever. Who cares? It certainly will not be the Brexit promised and championed by the Tory right. Given where I thought we were heading a few months ago, that is good enough for me. It's not ideal, but it could have been so much worse.
So low friction trade in goods and services - no freedom of movement - the Uk able to make external free trade deals and substantially reduced payments from the Uk. Oh and no ECJ...
Pretty much slap bang in the middle of public opinion I'd say.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
Actually the agreement specifically says the last resort occurs if there's neither a trade deal, nor another political solution.
So low friction trade in goods and services - no freedom of movement - the Uk able to make external free trade deals and substantially reduced payments from the Uk. Oh and no ECJ...
Pretty much slap bang in the middle of public opinion I'd say.
Sounds exactly like what Vote Leave were promising too.
He's got a problem, then, because the European Parliament wants the EU to go further on the rights of UK citizens currently living in an EU27 country - in particular, to ensure they can retain the right to move to other EU countries.
"Labour’s real problem is that it is failing to have a clear distinctive voice that resonates with the vast numbers of Labour voters who are strongly for remain."
In your eyes, Mike. In reality if Labour jumped that way they would lose a chunk of Leave voters in seats like Don Valley.
Facing both ways at once seems to be pretty sensible short-term tactics (and was the key reason they did so well in June). Of course, the Lib Dems' experience shows us the long-term perils of this approach.
Exactly, I'm no fan of Corbyn but I have to admit his ambivalence on this issue is something of a masterstroke. Leavers are a small minority in the PLP and membership but a much larger one among Labour voters. He's keeping them on board without alienating hardcore Remainers, some of whom, judging by my adventures on social media, genuinely believe he's going to stop Brexit.
That might have been tenable over an election campaign, but over a whole parliament (where you are also constantly critiquing the government's handling of Brexit) conspicuously having no policy of your own to offer as an alternative makes you look mendacious, incompetent, or both. Which doesn't make you seem any kind of improvement on the government you're trying to dislodge.
+1 for this. In the long term, Corbyn's ambivalence may turn out to be his Achilles heel. Brexit seems to be the dividing line in today's political world and unlike the Conservatives who are, for now, the pro Brexit party, Corbyn faces the unenviable task of squaring the circle between a fanatically pro EU youngish, Momentumite vote, and keeping the traditional WWC Labour vote on side.
His ambivalence worked at GE2017 because of the old maxim of never interrupt your enemies when they are making a mistake - Labour's position simply wasn't scrutinised, a vote for them was a 'free shot' against the government of the day. That position becomes more and more untenable as time goes by. Those who sit on fences are sometimes impaled on them...
Yes, I'd go along with most of that, except that I think the current strategy has a bit more milage in it.
So far the downsides of Brexit have been confined to the exchange rate, credit ratings, and some inflation. When it really starts to hit the working classes hard (white or otherwise) in terms of jobs and pay, enthusiasm for the project will wane and Labour (Corbyn led or otherwise) will have the perfect opportunity to take over.
The country will of course be in a right mess by then, but that shouldn't prevent the new Government from turning it into Venezuela.
In lieu of repeating myself (which doesn't stop most people on here in all honesty), it's hardly surprising the avalanche (or blizzard if you prefer an alternative winter analogy) of triumphalist pro-May and pro-Government sentiment over the weekend has had an impact.
Yes, we have a deal and to be honest a lot of it could have been concluded without the theatrics and the melodramatics but politicians are meant to be actors and entertainers so we shouldn't be surprised.
The detail of the "Triumph" needs a bit more investigation and may chip away at the euphoria a little. We are still going to pay at least £40 billion and possibly a great deal more and will remain to all intents and purposes in the EU until April 2021.
I would point out that it was us who asked for the transition period.
And, realistically, were always going to have to pay for that.
Yes, it means we don't fully leave the EU until April 2021. But a two year transition to a defined endpoint is good for business. It enables people to plan investment decisions properly. It allows time for us to replicate existing EU trade arrangements. It means that the nitty gritty about where financial services firms need to have presence, and where they need to hold capital, can be handled in a sensible fashion.
Given we wanted a two year transition, the £40bn or so seems pretty good value to me.
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
Actually the agreement specifically says the last resort occurs if there's neither a trade deal, nor another political solution.
Indeed, so to avoid the 'last resort' we need either a miracle technical solution, which everybody agrees does not exist and can be vetoed by Ireland in any case, or you need to get the Northern Ireland Assembly to vote for detaching itself from the rest of the UK.
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.
Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
Soft and bouncy Brexit here we come :-D
But Brexit.
Whatever. Who cares? It certainly will not be the Brexit promised and championed by the Tory right. Given where I thought we were heading a few months ago, that is good enough for me. It's not ideal, but it could have been so much worse.
Until Leave voters notice that nothing has changed.
May is good at saying "Nothing has Changed!". It's what won her the election.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Whatever. Who cares? It certainly will not be the Brexit promised and championed by the Tory right. Given where I thought we were heading a few months ago, that is good enough for me. It's not ideal, but it could have been so much worse.
So low friction trade in goods and services - no freedom of movement - the Uk able to make external free trade deals and substantially reduced payments from the Uk. Oh and no ECJ...
Pretty much slap bang in the middle of public opinion I'd say.
I disagree with TSE and Southam. I don't think it will be a very soft Brexit. The writing is on the wall for the City of London as Europe's dominant financial centre under any Brexit scenario, along with the associated tax take. A vote for Brexit is a vote for austerity. Car manufacturing and pharma, which are two big industries for us, are at risk because of rules of origin for export outside of the EU and compliance issues respectively. They may be OK, but there will likely be pressures to move their operations to the EU. Farming is another industry facing risk. The EU whose job it is to look after their members, will be seeking to take advantage of our weaker position, rather than seeking advantage for us, as when we are members. The big difference is between membership and non-membership rather than necessarily between different forms of non-membership, even if those matter too.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
And from a cynical tactical point of view, you just leave on the naughty step for a long enough, everybody forgets and the world moves on...that is Labour's approach to all the anti-Semitic problem individuals.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
Morris was suspended for 6 months and has publicly apologised. What more do you want from her?
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
Actually the agreement specifically says the last resort occurs if there's neither a trade deal, nor another political solution.
Indeed, so to avoid the 'last resort' we need either a miracle technical solution, which everybody agrees does not exist and can be vetoed by Ireland in any case, or you need to get the Northern Ireland Assembly to vote for detaching itself from the rest of the UK.
Or a trade deal which is what everybody is seeking. Once a trade deal is agreed then the "if there is no trade deal" passage becomes moot.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
Morris was suspended for 6 months and has publicly apologised. What more do you want from her?
Expelled from the party.
The next time Labour have an anti-semitisim problem they'll just cite what happened to Anne Marie Morris.
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
Actually the agreement specifically says the last resort occurs if there's neither a trade deal, nor another political solution.
Indeed, so to avoid the 'last resort' we need either a miracle technical solution, which everybody agrees does not exist and can be vetoed by Ireland in any case, or you need to get the Northern Ireland Assembly to vote for detaching itself from the rest of the UK.
Or a trade deal which is what everybody is seeking. Once a trade deal is agreed then the "if there is no trade deal" passage becomes moot.
A 'trade deal' which facilitates an open border and allows all-island economic cooperation on the current basis is not possible. This is not just rhetoric.
Jeremy Corbyn will never be prime minister. I repeat again: no opposition has ever formed a government if it has not been at least 15 points ahead in polls between elections. Miliband and Kinnock achieved 11 and 12 point leads in the polls and lost the general elections. Astonishingly, despite the sheer awfulness of this Tory government, Corbyn's Labour can only manage an average 2 point lead, and is now not in the lead at all.
Labour's problem is not Brexit, which is going to happen. Labour's problem is Corbyn and his hard left Marxist, economicaly illiterate policies. People like me are crying out for a decent alternative to the Tories, not Corbynista marxism, not Blairite revisionism, but the sort of opposition that we used to have under John Smith and Harold Wilson.
When that 10pm exit poll is revealed on the next election night many a Corbynista tear will be shed, but of course his deluded follower will claim that it is all a giant conspiracy....
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
Morris was suspended for 6 months and has publicly apologised. What more do you want from her?
Expelled from the party.
The next time Labour have an anti-semitisim problem they'll just cite what happened to Anne Marie Morris.
There's a huge difference between Morris mistakenly using an offensive word and having a deep-seated anti-Semitic attitude.
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
Actually the agreement specifically says the last resort occurs if there's neither a trade deal, nor another political solution.
Indeed, so to avoid the 'last resort' we need either a miracle technical solution, which everybody agrees does not exist and can be vetoed by Ireland in any case, or you need to get the Northern Ireland Assembly to vote for detaching itself from the rest of the UK.
Or a trade deal which is what everybody is seeking. Once a trade deal is agreed then the "if there is no trade deal" passage becomes moot.
A 'trade deal' which facilitates an open border and allows all-island economic cooperation on the current basis is not possible. This is not just rhetoric.
It is just rhetoric. If both parties sign a deal that includes an open border and all-island cooperation then it is done and possible.
As for Labour, why do they have to take a firm position ? They aren't the Government. My take on Corbyn is, like most people, there are things he likes and is interested in and things he isn't and while I'm sure he has a view on the generality of the EU he may be less engaged in the specifics. That's why he has Starmer and his team and if I'm being honest I suspect there's very little in the agreement with which Starmer (or indeed any proponent of a "soft" Treaty) could argue.
Regarding Corbyn saying little re Brexit.
Don't interfere when your opponent is busy shooting themselves in the foot.
At the moment no deal has been concluded. Sure the right wing rags have been rejoicing over the conclusion of Phase 1 but there is a very long way to go.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
Morris was suspended for 6 months and has publicly apologised. What more do you want from her?
Expelled from the party.
The next time Labour have an anti-semitisim problem they'll just cite what happened to Anne Marie Morris.
There's a huge difference between Morris mistakenly using an offensive word and having a deep-seated anti-Semitic attitude.
As the editor of the Jewish Chronicle has pointed out, if you don't know the n word isn't offensive, then you can argue the same about using the K word.
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
I am afraid you have not understood what has been agreed. Article 5 specifically says there is a caveat to the whole agreement.
"Under the caveat that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, the joint commitments set out below in this joint report shall be reflected in the Withdrawal Agreement in full detail."
The last resort is that there is no agreement. Under those circumstances nothing is agreed.
Mr Dancer, it would appear that Williams aren't going to give Kubica a drive for next season - they've opted to go with two pay drivers - the second seat will be either Sirotkin or Kvyat. They didn't even consider Di Resta.
Mr. F, yes, I know, but I'm curious about the leads they got then.
The best Labour did was a tiny lead of a few points in 2015 and it went on to lose the 2017 election. This is entirely in line with the fact that no opposition that was not at least 15 points ahead between elections has ever gone on to form a government.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
Morris was suspended for 6 months and has publicly apologised. What more do you want from her?
Expelled from the party.
The next time Labour have an anti-semitisim problem they'll just cite what happened to Anne Marie Morris.
There's a huge difference between Morris mistakenly using an offensive word and having a deep-seated anti-Semitic attitude.
As the editor of the Jewish Chronicle has pointed out, if you don't know the n word isn't offensive, then you can argue the same about using the K word.
If a Labour MP inadvertently used the K word in a (previously) well-known phrase or saying, then apologised when pointed out to them and did not repeat it, then why should they be punished more than Morris has been?
On the other hand, if an MP deliberately used it as a put down directly against someone, then they would have no excuses and should be expelled.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
Seems very reasonable. She used a phrase which used to be common but has now been banned because it includes a word which for some inexplicable reason only rappers (and black rappers at that) are now allowed to use. Of course politicians should be aware of what's banned, so she shouldn't have said it, but it's hardly a hanging offence.
Even The Spectator's political editor is criticising Mrs May for it.
Morris was suspended for 6 months and has publicly apologised. What more do you want from her?
Expelled from the party.
The next time Labour have an anti-semitisim problem they'll just cite what happened to Anne Marie Morris.
There's a huge difference between Morris mistakenly using an offensive word and having a deep-seated anti-Semitic attitude.
As the editor of the Jewish Chronicle has pointed out, if you don't know the n word isn't offensive, then you can argue the same about using the K word.
Indeed and if a Labour MP uses a bad word in one instance and then apologises, serves out their suspension and doesn't repeat it then I would say that is fair enough.
If they repeatedly are racist even after being criticised then that is very different.
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
As for Labour, why do they have to take a firm position ? They aren't the Government. My take on Corbyn is, like most people, there are things he likes and is interested in and things he isn't and while I'm sure he has a view on the generality of the EU he may be less engaged in the specifics. That's why he has Starmer and his team and if I'm being honest I suspect there's very little in the agreement with which Starmer (or indeed any proponent of a "soft" Treaty) could argue.
Regarding Corbyn saying little re Brexit.
Don't interfere when your opponent is busy shooting themselves in the foot.
At the moment no deal has been concluded. Sure the right wing rags have been rejoicing over the conclusion of Phase 1 but there is a very long way to go.
Not entirely sure that the stitching isn’t already coming undone in places.
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority and was taken pre May's EU agreement bounce
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority
But a majority none the less.
Even that is arguable as its Scottish poll only had Labour picking up 7 SNP seats and as I said it was taken pre May's EU breakthrough
It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.
This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.
Not as I think you understand it.
The EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.
The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
The gaps.
It happen.
Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
Soft and bouncy Brexit here we come :-D
But Brexit.
Whatever. Who cares? It certainly will not be the Brexit promised and championed by the Tory right. Given where I thought we were heading a few months ago, that is good enough for me. It's not ideal, but it could have been so much worse.
So low friction trade in goods and services - no freedom of movement - the Uk able to make external free trade deals and substantially reduced payments from the Uk. Oh and no ECJ...
Pretty much slap bang in the middle of public opinion I'd say.
Ending freedom of movement covers a multitude of sins - and cuts both ways, of course We'll see where we end up on that, as we will with the status of the ECJ (which is hardly a biggie in any case in practical terms). The UK will be able to make trade deals with people who are essentially OK with following EU regulations - so not the Americans, which is very good news indeed as they would insist on us following their rules and regulations; and hopefully reduced payments will be a net gain for us, depending on whether withdrawal depresses GDP. I am not delighted, but it could have been so much worse.
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority and was taken pre May's EU agreement bounce
If you are tired, then go to sleep. But its not spin, but factual to point out that the increase in the Labour vote was the result -mainly -of piling up votes in seats that Labour already held. Its not the percentage of the vote that matters, its the number of seats that a party wins. Corbyn piled up votes in seats that was already Labour, but failed spectacularly to win many Tory marginals. His tally of seats was similar to that won by Gordon Brown who only got 29% in 2010. But of course to Corbynistas like you, all is spin unless it agrees with the Corbynista viewpoint.
Yougov was predicting a hung parliament long before Survation during the election. (but chickened out at the last moment). Yougov is now using the same methodology it used when it predicted a hung parliament, and now finds Labour behind in the polls.
You are going to be so very disappointed on election night. And I am a mainstream John Smith/Harold Wilson Labour supporter.
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority
But a majority none the less.
assuming that all those older voters who abstained in 2017 do not come out in droves next time to stop this outcome
Mr. F, yes, I know, but I'm curious about the leads they got then.
The best Labour did was a tiny lead of a few points in 2015 and it went on to lose the 2017 election. This is entirely in line with the fact that no opposition that was not at least 15 points ahead between elections has ever gone on to form a government.
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority and was taken pre May's EU agreement bounce
If you are tired, then go to sleep. But its not spin, but factual to point out that the increase in the Labour vote was the result -mainly -of piling up votes in seats that Labour already held. Its not the percentage of the vote that matters, its the number of seats that a party wins. Corbyn piled up votes in seats that was already Labour, but failed spectacularly to win many Tory marginals. His tally of seats was similar to that won by Gordon Brown who only got 29% in 2010. But of course to Corbynistas like you, all is spin unless it agrees with the Corbynista viewpoint.
Yougov was predicting a hung parliament long before Survation during the election. (but chickened out at the last moment). Yougov is now using the same methodology it used when it predicted a hung parliament, and now finds Labour behind in the polls.
You are going to be so very disappointed on election night. And I am a mainstream John Smith/Harold Wilson Labour supporter.
This is brilliant. Who are you calling a Corbynista; HYUFD, TSE, or MD?
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority and was taken pre May's EU agreement bounce
If you are tired, then go to sleep. But its not spin, but factual to point out that the increase in the Labour vote was the result -mainly -of piling up votes in seats that Labour already held. Its not the percentage of the vote that matters, its the number of seats that a party wins. Corbyn piled up votes in seats that was already Labour, but failed spectacularly to win many Tory marginals. His tally of seats was similar to that won by Gordon Brown who only got 29% in 2010. But of course to Corbynistas like you, all is spin unless it agrees with the Corbynista viewpoint.
Yougov was predicting a hung parliament long before Survation during the election. (but chickened out at the last moment). Yougov is now using the same methodology it used when it predicted a hung parliament, and now finds Labour behind in the polls.
You are going to be so very disappointed on election night. And I am a mainstream John Smith/Harold Wilson Labour supporter.
You do know the next election is four and a half years away, right?
Jeremy Corbyn will never be prime minister. I repeat again: no opposition has ever formed a government if it has not been at least 15 points ahead in polls between elections. Miliband and Kinnock achieved 11 and 12 point leads in the polls and lost the general elections. Astonishingly, despite the sheer awfulness of this Tory government, Corbyn's Labour can only manage an average 2 point lead, and is now not in the lead at all.
Labour's problem is not Brexit, which is going to happen. Labour's problem is Corbyn and his hard left Marxist, economicaly illiterate policies. People like me are crying out for a decent alternative to the Tories, not Corbynista marxism, not Blairite revisionism, but the sort of opposition that we used to have under John Smith and Harold Wilson.
When that 10pm exit poll is revealed on the next election night many a Corbynista tear will be shed, but of course his deluded follower will claim that it is all a giant conspiracy....
Not sure it is wise in view of Trump to relay on old wisdom like "no opposition has ever formed a government if it has not been at least 15 points ahead in polls between elections"
We live in febrile times.
Corbyn is absolute marmite. I suspect he will turn-off enough voters not to win, as you say, but I just really don't know, especially this far out.
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
I am afraid you have not understood what has been agreed. Article 5 specifically says there is a caveat to the whole agreement.
"Under the caveat that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, the joint commitments set out below in this joint report shall be reflected in the Withdrawal Agreement in full detail."
The last resort is that there is no agreement. Under those circumstances nothing is agreed.
Yep, the wholly destructive cliff edge is still there. But it is fading into the distance.
There is “no possibility” that Britain and the European Union can conclude a free trade agreement by the time Britain leaves in March 2019, EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barner said on Tuesday.
There is “no possibility” that Britain and the European Union can conclude a free trade agreement by the time Britain leaves in March 2019, EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barner said on Tuesday.
Given that they legally can't be agreed before Brexit, why is this news?
What is this limp, cringing shite? We're Conservatives, not thought policing Labour commissars. We should be weaponising the battle against political correctness the way the Republicans have so effectively in the US. Let's propose a bill to make free speech absolute, with the only exception being direct incitement to violence - it costs no money, but opens up a large and productive front in a culture war that's being lost because we're not bothering to fight it.
There is “no possibility” that Britain and the European Union can conclude a free trade agreement by the time Britain leaves in March 2019, EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barner said on Tuesday.
Given that they legally can't be agreed before Brexit, why is this news?
Mr. F, how did Labour did for leads in the 2015-2017 Parliament?
Labour led a few times with YouGov by 3% during the run up to the referendum, when the Tories were tearing themselves apart over the referendum.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
and then went on to lose the general election with roughly a similar number of seats under Gordon Brown in 2010. Only by being at least 15 points ahead now would it look as if Labour was likely to capture enough Tory marginals to be able to form a government after the next election. But Labour today is 2 points behind,
Your constant spinning is tiring.
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Even Survation does not give Corbyn a poll lead big enough for a working majority and was taken pre May's EU agreement bounce
If you are tired, then go to sleep. But its not spin, but factual to point out that the increase in the Labour vote was the result -mainly -of piling up votes in seats that Labour already held. Its not the percentage of the vote that matters, its the number of seats that a party wins. Corbyn piled up votes in seats that was already Labour, but failed spectacularly to win many Tory marginals. His tally of seats was similar to that won by Gordon Brown who only got 29% in 2010. But of course to Corbynistas like you, all is spin unless it agrees with the Corbynista viewpoint.
Yougov was predicting a hung parliament long before Survation during the election. (but chickened out at the last moment). Yougov is now using the same methodology it used when it predicted a hung parliament, and now finds Labour behind in the polls.
You are going to be so very disappointed on election night. And I am a mainstream John Smith/Harold Wilson Labour supporter.
You do know the next election is four and a half years away, right?
I think he does , surely after 400 posts making the same point, there might be some variation.
Stop press****Corbynista news (all else is fake). ***Labour might be 2 points behind today, Labour might only have won a similar number of seats as Gordon Brown in 2010, it might be true that no opposition has ever formed a government without being at least 15 points ahead in the polls between elections, but just you wait till the next elections when all those Tories in marginal seats decide that what they really want is for an economically illiterate Marxist who thinks Castro is a hero, and Venezuela the very model of good economic practice should become prime minister.
According to a tranche of documents released by the CIA, Osama bin Laden visited Stratford-upon-Avon as a teenager, and if we read between the lines a bit, it is extremely obvious that it was then – precisely, inarguably then – that he became irretrievably riled by the West.
“I got the impression that they were a loose people, and my age didn’t allow me to form a complete picture of life there. We went every Sunday to visit Shakespeare’s house. I was not impressed and I saw that they were a society different from ours and that they were a morally loose society.”
What is this limp, cringing shite? We're Conservatives, not thought policing Labour commissars. We should be weaponising the battle against political correctness the way the Republicans have so effectively in the US. Let's propose a bill to make free speech absolute, with the only exception being direct incitement to violence - it costs no money, but opens up a large and productive front in a culture war that's being lost because we're not bothering to fight it.
Ummm:
This isn't a question of free speech. Taking an extreme example. it is perfectly good and proper that people should be allowed to publish Mein Kampf. It is not good and proper for a Conservative MP to go around repeating Meim Kampf as policy.
Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
I am afraid you have not understood what has been agreed. Article 5 specifically says there is a caveat to the whole agreement.
"Under the caveat that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, the joint commitments set out below in this joint report shall be reflected in the Withdrawal Agreement in full detail."
The last resort is that there is no agreement. Under those circumstances nothing is agreed.
Yep, the wholly destructive cliff edge is still there. But it is fading into the distance.
This isn't a question of free speech. Taking an extreme example. it is perfectly good and proper that people should be allowed to publish Mein Kampf. It is not good and proper for a Conservative MP to go around repeating Meim Kampf as policy.
True, but these shifting verbal sands can be treacherous, what with words which used to be utterly forbidden in polite society now being common, and words which used to be common now being utterly forbidden. I try to keep up, but I'm puzzled as to whether 'cowboy builder' is still OK, or whether it's now regarded as offensive to the American ranching community, and if not, why not.
........and then after persuading all those Tory marginals to vote Marxist, that nice Mr.Corbyn is going to jolly well sort out the country forever. No one will ever be poor again, the NHS will have all the money it wants, everyone will have a huge pay rise, student tuition fees will be abolished as will all existing debts, the trains will run on time, everything will be nationalised, workers will be given the right to strike every day of the week, the homeless will live in shiny new houses, and everyone will be so so happy because no one except the few will pay higher taxes, and the UK will be a happy clappy land with pictures of Jeremy all over the walls, and everyone will sing "Oh! Jeremy Corbyn!"
Stop press****Corbynista news (all else is fake). ***Labour might be 2 points behind today, Labour might only have won a similar number of seats as Gordon Brown in 2010, it might be true that no opposition has ever formed a government without being at least 15 points ahead in the polls between elections, but just you wait till the next elections when all those Tories in marginal seats decide that what they really want is for an economically illiterate Marxist who thinks Castro is a hero, and Venezuela the very model of good economic practice should become prime minister.
All power to you, stevef - I hope you're right. But I'm afraid that political gravity will drag the Tories down by the next election even with a totally unqualified Corbyn as the alternative. If the 2017 result had happened in 2020, it might have been seen as a triumph - May riding out the Brexit storm with a 1992-style surprise victory. But the events of the next 4.5 years are on balance more likely to piss voters off than to win them over...
........and then after persuading all those Tory marginals to vote Marxist, that nice Mr.Corbyn is going to jolly well sort out the country forever. No one will ever be poor again, the NHS will have all the money it wants, everyone will have a huge pay rise, student tuition fees will be abolished as will all existing debts, the trains will run on time, everything will be nationalised, workers will be given the right to strike every day of the week, the homeless will live in shiny new houses, and everyone will be so so happy because no one except the few will pay higher taxes, and the UK will be a happy clappy land with pictures of Jeremy all over the walls, and everyone will sing "Oh! Jeremy Corbyn!"
Well that part might not be true, but I'm certainly not ruling out him winning yet.
Comments
BINO here we come.
His ambivalence worked at GE2017 because of the old maxim of never interrupt your enemies when they are making a mistake - Labour's position simply wasn't scrutinised, a vote for them was a 'free shot' against the government of the day. That position becomes more and more untenable as time goes by. Those who sit on fences are sometimes impaled on them...
Looks like Disney will now own the X-Men and Fantastic Four Film rights as well as the Avengers rights.
Proper crossovers.
Deal to be announced on Thursday.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/12/fox-disney-on-glide-path-for-thursday-deal-announcement-sources.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-brexit-delay-tory-rebel-conservatives-eu-withdrawal-bill-dominic-grieve-government-lose-a8105916.html
Then again, they would say that, wouldn't they? Only 3 are prepared to put their heads above the parapet, and that ignores the effect of Labour Leave MPs.
Pretty much slap bang in the middle of public opinion I'd say.
EMBATTLED Newton Abbot constituency MP Anne Marie Morris has been given the early Christmas present she was desperately hoping for... restoration of the Tory party whip.
https://twitter.com/stephenpollard/status/940617336033247232
So far the downsides of Brexit have been confined to the exchange rate, credit ratings, and some inflation. When it really starts to hit the working classes hard (white or otherwise) in terms of jobs and pay, enthusiasm for the project will wane and Labour (Corbyn led or otherwise) will have the perfect opportunity to take over.
The country will of course be in a right mess by then, but that shouldn't prevent the new Government from turning it into Venezuela.
And, realistically, were always going to have to pay for that.
Yes, it means we don't fully leave the EU until April 2021. But a two year transition to a defined endpoint is good for business. It enables people to plan investment decisions properly. It allows time for us to replicate existing EU trade arrangements. It means that the nitty gritty about where financial services firms need to have presence, and where they need to hold capital, can be handled in a sensible fashion.
Given we wanted a two year transition, the £40bn or so seems pretty good value to me.
The former world heavyweight champion was charged in June 2016 for using a banned steroid, but blamed the result on eating uncastrated wild boar.
No sniggering at the back...
Morris was suspended for 6 months and has publicly apologised. What more do you want from her?
https://twitter.com/MaryRachel_McC/status/940564024399458306
The next time Labour have an anti-semitisim problem they'll just cite what happened to Anne Marie Morris.
Labour's problem is not Brexit, which is going to happen. Labour's problem is Corbyn and his hard left Marxist, economicaly illiterate policies. People like me are crying out for a decent alternative to the Tories, not Corbynista marxism, not Blairite revisionism, but the sort of opposition that we used to have under John Smith and Harold Wilson.
When that 10pm exit poll is revealed on the next election night many a Corbynista tear will be shed, but of course his deluded follower will claim that it is all a giant conspiracy....
There's a huge difference between Morris mistakenly using an offensive word and having a deep-seated anti-Semitic attitude.
Don't interfere when your opponent is busy shooting themselves in the foot.
At the moment no deal has been concluded. Sure the right wing rags have been rejoicing over the conclusion of Phase 1 but there is a very long way to go.
YouGov were the only pollster to pick up any Labour leads.
"Under the caveat that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, the joint commitments set out below in this joint report shall be reflected in the Withdrawal Agreement in full detail."
The last resort is that there is no agreement. Under those circumstances nothing is agreed.
If a Labour MP inadvertently used the K word in a (previously) well-known phrase or saying, then apologised when pointed out to them and did not repeat it, then why should they be punished more than Morris has been?
On the other hand, if an MP deliberately used it as a put down directly against someone, then they would have no excuses and should be expelled.
If they repeatedly are racist even after being criticised then that is very different.
Neo-Nazi Robert Warren Ray Endorsed Roy Moore for Quoting Hitler Correctly.
https://secondnexus.com/news/politics/robert-warren-ray-roy-moore-nazi-hitler/
Corbyn oversaw a near 10% increase in Labour's vote, a swing from the Tories, and probably only needing a sub 1% next time to form the next government,
Labour's share of the vote was only fractionally lower than Blair's in 2001.
And of course the most accurate pollster at the last election has Labour 8% ahead.
Yougov was predicting a hung parliament long before Survation during the election. (but chickened out at the last moment). Yougov is now using the same methodology it used when it predicted a hung parliament, and now finds Labour behind in the polls.
You are going to be so very disappointed on election night. And I am a mainstream John Smith/Harold Wilson Labour supporter.
We live in febrile times.
Corbyn is absolute marmite. I suspect he will turn-off enough voters not to win, as you say, but I just really don't know, especially this far out.
Mr. E, a shame, I think Di Resta's underrated. Does Kvyat bring cash?
Edited extra bit: Mr. F, cheers.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-barnier/eus-barnier-rules-out-full-eu-uk-trade-pact-in-time-for-brexit-idUSKBN1E6289
There is “no possibility” that Britain and the European Union can conclude a free trade agreement by the time Britain leaves in March 2019, EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barner said on Tuesday.
I learned it from an article about when Jesse Jackson made some anti-Semitic comments back in the 80s.
There's a real passion among these young Corbynistas in all aspects of their life.
Mr. Eagles, thou art a bedfellow of Satan, led astray by thy sin!
“I got the impression that they were a loose people, and my age didn’t allow me to form a complete picture of life there. We went every Sunday to visit Shakespeare’s house. I was not impressed and I saw that they were a society different from ours and that they were a morally loose society.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/articles/stratford-upon-avon-and-osama-bin-laden/
Its a good job they didn't take him on trips to Essex !!!
This isn't a question of free speech. Taking an extreme example. it is perfectly good and proper that people should be allowed to publish Mein Kampf. It is not good and proper for a Conservative MP to go around repeating Meim Kampf as policy.
They'll rail against the rich, Tories, bankers, public schoolboys and flaunt their women of the people credentials.
But they don't mind spending their money and staying in 4*/5* hotels.
Edit - For bonus value, they'll rail about the above whilst quaffing the £200 a bottle champagne you've got them.