@tconnellyRTE: Here’s what a senior EU official says: “You can’t have frictionless trade and be outside the customs union and the single market. The way to have frictionless trade is to be in those constructions. That’s why they were created.”
@tconnellyRTE: And here’s what Boris Johnson says today:“What we need to do is something new & ambitious, which allows zero tariffs & frictionless trade but still gives us that important freedom to decide our own regulatory framework, our own laws & do things in a distinctive way in the future”
Brexit will be soft and fluffy. It will change very little, except living standards - which will be lower than they would otherwise have been - and the UK’s international standing - which will be diminished. Buy shares in Betrayal.
You hope.
Yep, it’s the best case scenario from here. The alternatives are much worse. I notice the Sun is pushing plans to reduce employee rights post-Brexit, for example.
@tconnellyRTE: Here’s what a senior EU official says: “You can’t have frictionless trade and be outside the customs union and the single market. The way to have frictionless trade is to be in those constructions. That’s why they were created.”
@tconnellyRTE: And here’s what Boris Johnson says today:“What we need to do is something new & ambitious, which allows zero tariffs & frictionless trade but still gives us that important freedom to decide our own regulatory framework, our own laws & do things in a distinctive way in the future”
Brexit will be soft and fluffy. It will change very little, except living standards - which will be lower than they would otherwise have been - and the UK’s international standing - which will be diminished. Buy shares in Betrayal.
You hope.
Yep, it’s the best case scenario from here. The alternatives are much worse. I notice the Sun is pushing plans to reduce employee rights post-Brexit, for example.
You're hoping for the UK to be poorer. At least you've admitted it this time.
Another problem with EUREF2 is that if it produces a different result we will unleash a very nasty state of affairs into our national life for the foreseeable future. Without wishing to invoke Godwin’s law, I fear some sort of ‘stab in the back’ narrative which would be incredibly unhealthy for the stability of our society and democracy.
What if there was a referendum asking the voters, if they wanted another vote on leaving the EU ? If daring to ask the people is so wonderful.
I made very clear, I hold nothing against remain voters, it's the MPs who have been instructed by the people that are defying said instruction that I hold in contempt. Grieve and his 10 traitors should be purged from our party at the first possible opportunity.
@tnewtondunn: Ken Clarke: “Eurosceptics have been voting against the Govt for the last 30 years. No one on my side has ever threatened to expel them to darkness” #bbcsp
MPs who have been instructed by the people that are defying said instruction that I hold in contempt.
When were you campaigning for Bone and Cash to be expelled?
The difference is hat we've since had a vote. All of the government action prior to the referendum was done without specific public approval. If there was a referendum on Lisbon that was approved and Tory EUsceptics voted against the enactment bill I would be calling for them to go as well. The public has taken a decision and now it is up to MPs to enact that decision. Their personal views (EU federalism) takes a back seat. The EUsceptic MPs before the referendum voting against the government weren't voting against the public's wishes. That's the difference and Ken knows this, which is why he is trying to muddy the waters.
Is there any evidence the public was opposed to the amendment voted on last week?
An amendment designed to reverse the public vote? Yes. They can call it what they want but that is the desired effect of their amendment. Hoping that Labour will be in by then so they can vote down the deal and then reverse A50. Their treachery is complete, going against the public vote and willing their party to lose. Their love of the EU has completely taken over all of their senses.
So, no evidence at all then.
Conversely, any evidence they supported it?
Can anyone explain exactly what the vote last week was actually about? For all the talk about it, I still don’t understand what it actually changed except that Parliament can now vote to reject the deal if they wish.
An interesting observation from the economist Ann Pettifor in today's Observer: ' Labour has a record, in key respects, of being more fiscally conservative than Conservatives. For example, a review by economists at Policy Research in Macroeconomics of current budget deficits or surpluses (that is, excluding public investment) for the whole period before the global financial crisis, from 1956 to 2008, reveals that Conservative governments had an average annual surplus of 0.3% of GDP, while Labour governments had an average annual surplus of 1.1%.'
An interesting observation from the economist Ann Pettifor in today's Observer: ' Labour has a record, in key respects, of being more fiscally conservative than Conservatives. For example, a review by economists at Policy Research in Macroeconomics of current budget deficits or surpluses (that is, excluding public investment) for the whole period before the global financial crisis, from 1956 to 2008, reveals that Conservative governments had an average annual surplus of 0.3% of GDP, while Labour governments had an average annual surplus of 1.1%.'
Er, because Labour gets a Golden Inheritance - and the Tories have to pick up Labour's fucked experiments with the public finances.....
@tconnellyRTE: Here’s what a senior EU official says: “You can’t have frictionless trade and be outside the customs union and the single market. The way to have frictionless trade is to be in those constructions. That’s why they were created.”
@tconnellyRTE: And here’s what Boris Johnson says today:“What we need to do is something new & ambitious, which allows zero tariffs & frictionless trade but still gives us that important freedom to decide our own regulatory framework, our own laws & do things in a distinctive way in the future”
Brexit will be soft and fluffy. It will change very little, except living standards - which will be lower than they would otherwise have been - and the UK’s international standing - which will be diminished. Buy shares in Betrayal.
You hope.
Yep, it’s the best case scenario from here. The alternatives are much worse. I notice the Sun is pushing plans to reduce employee rights post-Brexit, for example.
You're hoping for the UK to be poorer. At least you've admitted it this time.
No, I’m hoping soft and fluffy Brexit does not inflict the decline hard Brexit would. Sadly, Brexit will make the country poorer and less significant. The only question is by how much.
An interesting observation from the economist Ann Pettifor in today's Observer: ' Labour has a record, in key respects, of being more fiscally conservative than Conservatives. For example, a review by economists at Policy Research in Macroeconomics of current budget deficits or surpluses (that is, excluding public investment) for the whole period before the global financial crisis, from 1956 to 2008, reveals that Conservative governments had an average annual surplus of 0.3% of GDP, while Labour governments had an average annual surplus of 1.1%.'
Er, because Labour gets a Golden Inheritance - and the Tories have to pick up Labour's fucked experiments with the public finances.....
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.In 1964 Labour inherited a big Balance of Payments deficit from the outgoing Tory Government - indeed the departing Tory Chancellor - Reggie Maudling - apologised to the new Chancellor - James Callaghan - for having left things 'in such a mess'. Then again, there was Labour's Golden Inheritance of March 1974 - the Three Day Week ,rapidly increasing inflation at 13.5% , a big Balance of Payments deficit and a large Budget Deficit. That was very different to the scenario inherited by the Tories in June 1970 - ie a Balance of Payments Surplus and a Budget Surplus.
An interesting observation from the economist Ann Pettifor in today's Observer: ' Labour has a record, in key respects, of being more fiscally conservative than Conservatives. For example, a review by economists at Policy Research in Macroeconomics of current budget deficits or surpluses (that is, excluding public investment) for the whole period before the global financial crisis, from 1956 to 2008, reveals that Conservative governments had an average annual surplus of 0.3% of GDP, while Labour governments had an average annual surplus of 1.1%.'
Er, because Labour gets a Golden Inheritance - and the Tories have to pick up Labour's fucked experiments with the public finances.....
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.In 1964 Labour inherited a big Balance of Payments deficit from the outgoing Tory Government - indeed the departing Tory Chancellor - Reggie Maudling - apologised to the new Chancellor - James Callaghan - for having left things 'in such a mess'. Then again, there was Labour's Golden Inheritance of March 1974 - the Three Day Week ,rapidly increasing inflation at 13.5% , a big Balance of Payments deficit and a large Budget Deficit. That was very different to the scenario inherited by the Tories in June 1970 - ie a Balance of Payments Surplus and a Budget Surplus.
@tconnellyRTE: Here’s what a senior EU official says: “You can’t have frictionless trade and be outside the customs union and the single market. The way to have frictionless trade is to be in those constructions. That’s why they were created.”
@tconnellyRTE: And here’s what Boris Johnson says today:“What we need to do is something new & ambitious, which allows zero tariffs & frictionless trade but still gives us that important freedom to decide our own regulatory framework, our own laws & do things in a distinctive way in the future”
I suppose it depends what is meant by frictionless.
No, it's magical thinking. If you're an exporter, having to allow for different regulations creates friction - can be minor (perhaps a different colour) or major (an ingredient is illegal in one jurisdiction), but always a nuisance. It is by definition actually impossible to have different regulations and still be frictionless. Boris is just making it up as he goes along, as usual.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
Not surprising the best reviewed Labour government actually did have a magic money tree
It is fair to say that every single government since 1931 (where it really was out of the control of their government) has made a mess of the economic management of the economy. Ultimately, warned by the brutal fate of Labour under Macdonald and Snowden, who cut the budget to ensure national economic survival and near as damnit destroyed their party as well as their government by doing so, very few people have been willing to tell hard economic truths for fear of the electoral consequences.
That article is particularly interesting for quoting Bevin's view on the need for hard choices, which neither side was willing to make in the 1950s. In the 1960s Lloyd was sacked for trying to stabilise an economic situation that under Maudling and to a rather greater extent Callaghan got badly out of hand. Thatcher may have been a partial exception, but having identified inflation as a menace she failed to attack the economic problems Britain faced in the round and left at best a very mixed legacy. Brown, meanwhile, stuck deliberately to tight spending plans for a few years (arguably the 97-00 surpluses should be in the blue column, as they were planned by Clarke) before blowing capital on a series of pre-election bribes in 2001 and then borrowing more and more thereafter to maintain higher spending without higher taxes, which he thought - correctly - would buy his party seats.
If I had an easy solution I would share it. But I haven't.
@tconnellyRTE: Here’s what a senior EU official says: “You can’t have frictionless trade and be outside the customs union and the single market. The way to have frictionless trade is to be in those constructions. That’s why they were created.”
@tconnellyRTE: And here’s what Boris Johnson says today:“What we need to do is something new & ambitious, which allows zero tariffs & frictionless trade but still gives us that important freedom to decide our own regulatory framework, our own laws & do things in a distinctive way in the future”
I suppose it depends what is meant by frictionless.
No, it's magical thinking. If you're an exporter, having to allow for different regulations creates friction - can be minor (perhaps a different colour) or major (an ingredient is illegal in one jurisdiction), but always a nuisance. It is by definition actually impossible to have different regulations and still be frictionless. Boris is just making it up as he goes along, as usual.
Good points. My career has coincided with the harmonisation of many regulations and the reduction in the amount of paperwork I have to do. Funnily enough it hadn't occurred to me prior the the referendum that it was a consequence of EU membership. I just took it for granted as natural progress. The reality is the opposite of what you often hear. EU membership has cut red tape and time wasting bureaucratic hurdles.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Although on the narrow view of the budget you may be correct, the Conservatives would perhaps have disagreed with you about the economy as a whole in 1951:
The Attlee government – displaying an instinctive faith in state planning as a means to achieve prosperity – did not address the long-standing weaknesses in the British economy that stood in the way of a restoration of national solvency. In focusing on welfare projects that Britain was reliant on other governments to finance via aid, Labour fudged critical choices about the structure of post-war Britain.
I think you would find that article rather interesting - the link is here:
Which is exactly why the serious work going on behind the scenes is being kept very close to the chests of those involved - even if the occasional embarrassing headline results, such as Davis’ select committee appearance a couple of weeks ago.
Welcome back Tapestry
So remind me, how much taxpayers’ money did Eck Salmond spend to hide the fact that he had no legal advice?
Zero. The whole point was that Government do not give out legal advice guidance to any toerag that asks for it. Lying Tories do not change the fact.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
But unemployment quadrupled, poverty doubled, our industrial base was wiped out, she lost the Falklands through negligence and blood was spilled to get them back, our council house stock was eliminated creating terrible housing shortage, -and jeremy Corbyn was doing all he could to make Labour unelectable.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
RPI inflation in November 1990 was little changed from the level inherited in May 1979. In Thatcher's first year in office inflation reached 22% by Spring 1980 - partly self inflicted by hiking VAT from 8% to 15% in the June 79 Budget and forcing public utilities to raise prices sharply. Thereafter, it did fall back to low single figures in the mid- 1980s before surging again to over 10% in the late 80s.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
RPI inflation in November 1990 was little changed from the level inherited in May 1979. In Thatcher's first year in office inflation reached 22% by Spring 1980 - partly self inflicted by hiking VAT from 8% to 15% in the June 79 Budget and forcing public utilities to raise prices sharply. Thereafter, it did fall back to low single figures in the mid- 1980s before surging again to over 10% in the late 80s.
Yep, but it rapidly came back down again, and we’ve not seen the same periods of high inflation that were common in the 70s
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
Perhaps the perils of long tenure, but the £ lost more value due to inflation under Thatcher than under any other pm. You could of course compare her with Blair who was pm for ten years to her eleven...
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
RPI inflation in November 1990 was little changed from the level inherited in May 1979. In Thatcher's first year in office inflation reached 22% by Spring 1980 - partly self inflicted by hiking VAT from 8% to 15% in the June 79 Budget and forcing public utilities to raise prices sharply. Thereafter, it did fall back to low single figures in the mid- 1980s before surging again to over 10% in the late 80s.
Yep, but it rapidly came back down again, and we’ve not seen the same periods of high inflation that were common in the 70s
Indeed - but that has been true of the world economy as a whole - and extends to th later Labour Government too.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
Perhaps the perils of long tenure, but the £ lost more value due to inflation under Thatcher than under any other pm. You could of course compare her with Blair who was pm for ten years to her eleven...
This whole discussion started with someone pointing out Labour have had a Golden inheritance in general - anyone trying to deny the low inflation under Blair was driven by the tough decisions of Thatcher fundamentally changing what became normal inflation is on another planet.
Really? In 1945 Labour had the Golden Inheritance of World War 2 to deal with.
They also had a huge share of Marshall Aid, over and above a loan of $4 billion from the Americans, which they proceeded to fritter away. This article by Corelli Barnett amusingly compares Attlee's economic record on spending capital to Thatcher:
The Tories did not inherit a difficult Budgetary scenario in October 1951.In May 1979 inflation at 10.2% was significantly lower than that bequeathed in March 1974. Morover, after 11.5 years in office Thatcher left an inflation rate in November 1990 that had barely changed - 9.7%
Inflation was generally lower throughout her tenure, you make it sound like it was virtually unchanged.
Perhaps the perils of long tenure, but the £ lost more value due to inflation under Thatcher than under any other pm. You could of course compare her with Blair who was pm for ten years to her eleven...
This whole discussion started with someone pointing out Labour have had a Golden inheritance in general - anyone trying to deny the low inflation under Blair was driven by the tough decisions of Thatcher fundamentally changing what became normal inflation is on another planet.
Not really. Inflation throughout 1978 was circa 8%. Moreover, it was in low single figures for most of the 1964 - 1970 Labour Government.
Comments
' Labour has a record, in key respects, of being more fiscally conservative than Conservatives. For example, a review by economists at Policy Research in Macroeconomics of current budget deficits or surpluses (that is, excluding public investment) for the whole period before the global financial crisis, from 1956 to 2008, reveals that Conservative governments had an average annual surplus of 0.3% of GDP, while Labour governments had an average annual surplus of 1.1%.'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/marshall_01.shtml
Still, if you wish to claim him, there's a fair few Americans who'd probably want you to take him.
That article is particularly interesting for quoting Bevin's view on the need for hard choices, which neither side was willing to make in the 1950s. In the 1960s Lloyd was sacked for trying to stabilise an economic situation that under Maudling and to a rather greater extent Callaghan got badly out of hand. Thatcher may have been a partial exception, but having identified inflation as a menace she failed to attack the economic problems Britain faced in the round and left at best a very mixed legacy. Brown, meanwhile, stuck deliberately to tight spending plans for a few years (arguably the 97-00 surpluses should be in the blue column, as they were planned by Clarke) before blowing capital on a series of pre-election bribes in 2001 and then borrowing more and more thereafter to maintain higher spending without higher taxes, which he thought - correctly - would buy his party seats.
If I had an easy solution I would share it. But I haven't.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22070491
The Attlee government – displaying an instinctive faith in state planning as a means to achieve prosperity – did not address the long-standing weaknesses in the British economy that stood in the way of a restoration of national solvency. In focusing on welfare projects that Britain was reliant on other governments to finance via aid, Labour fudged critical choices about the structure of post-war Britain.
I think you would find that article rather interesting - the link is here:
http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/85710/2/Fall of Attlee Govt.pdf
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10367759/Alex-Salmond-spent-20000-keeping-secret-non-existent-EU-legal-advice.html
NEW THREAD