Good piece by Simon Jenkins in the Guardian, advocating the Norway option, with a review in 10 years. Suggests May asks Labour to support her on that. Might well get a Commons majority.
I'm not a big fan of Jenkins, but this time I think he's probably right. However, I have one caveat: The EEA exists at the whim of the EU. They only have to give one years notice and its gone (for the EU nations anyway, rendering it useless).
The aim of the next EU treaty will be to combine the single market with the main TFEU - at which point the EEA will be redundant to the EU nations. So if we go to the EEA either via EFTA or as a shadow agreement, we must almost immediately begin to prepare for the process of leaving it just in case the EU roll it up.
A government minister has been disciplined after he suggested that the Government should reconsider going ahead with Brexit if the evidence suggests it is not in "our country's best interests".
Or to be more accurate, a Government minister has been disciplined for being critical of government policy. As you would expect.
So why isn’t Mrs May disciplining Steve Baker?
He’s a proven liar and smearer, Damian McBride would be proud of him.
He has accepted he was wrong and apologised.
Only when it was shown that he was a liar.
If that recording hadn’t emerged he’d have happily kept on lying.
Was he unaware that there was a recording? All seems bizarre to me...
Yup.
He’s created the precedent for Corbyn and McDonnell to lie and smear the civil service with impugnity if they ever get into power.
To add - David Davis is reported in the guardian as muttering to Baker before he replied that he should deny it as it isn’t true. So he comes out of this strange episode as honest.
Corbyn and McDonnell will doubtless get frustrated with the civil service - but ultimately they like public sector workers...
A government minister has been disciplined after he suggested that the Government should reconsider going ahead with Brexit if the evidence suggests it is not in "our country's best interests".
Or to be more accurate, a Government minister has been disciplined for being critical of government policy. As you would expect.
So why isn’t Mrs May disciplining Steve Baker?
He’s a proven liar and smearer, Damian McBride would be proud of him.
He has accepted he was wrong and apologised.
Only when it was shown that he was a liar.
If that recording hadn’t emerged he’d have happily kept on lying.
Was he unaware that there was a recording? All seems bizarre to me...
Yup.
He’s created the precedent for Corbyn and McDonnell to lie and smear the civil service with impugnity if they ever get into power.
To add - David Davis is reported in the guardian as muttering to Baker before he replied that he should deny it as it isn’t true. So he comes out of this strange episode as honest.
Corbyn and McDonnell will doubtless get frustrated with the civil service - but ultimately they like public sector workers...
A government minister has been disciplined after he suggested that the Government should reconsider going ahead with Brexit if the evidence suggests it is not in "our country's best interests".
Or to be more accurate, a Government minister has been disciplined for being critical of government policy. As you would expect.
So why isn’t Mrs May disciplining Steve Baker?
He’s a proven liar and smearer, Damian McBride would be proud of him.
He has accepted he was wrong and apologised.
Only when it was shown that he was a liar.
If that recording hadn’t emerged he’d have happily kept on lying.
Was he unaware that there was a recording? All seems bizarre to me...
Yup.
He’s created the precedent for Corbyn and McDonnell to lie and smear the civil service with impugnity if they ever get into power.
The Tory Brexit loons have enabled Corbyn and McDonnell. They showed that Cake and Eat It, Project Fear works brilliantly as an electoral strategy, and that attacking long-standing British institutions - Parliament, the courts, the civil service, the BBC, etc - as enemies of the people can be a very successful and destructive strategy.
Getting people to turn out at minor elections is the biggest issue with democratic accountability. Ten times more important that who is or who is not allowed to vote. This really bothers me. Instinctively I don't like the Australian compulsion but what are the alternatives ?
I am greatly against compulsion to vote unless either the penalty was low (fat chance) or
One of my electors thinks no-one should be elected without the votes of say 35% of the eligible electorate. - there would soon be no councillors if that were to be enforced I think.
A none of the above option is a must if there is a compulsion to vote. That way if NOTA wins then all the candidates are disqualified from the re-run.
A government minister has been disciplined after he suggested that the Government should reconsider going ahead with Brexit if the evidence suggests it is not in "our country's best interests".
Or to be more accurate, a Government minister has been disciplined for being critical of government policy. As you would expect.
So why isn’t Mrs May disciplining Steve Baker?
He’s a proven liar and smearer, Damian McBride would be proud of him.
He has accepted he was wrong and apologised.
Only when it was shown that he was a liar.
If that recording hadn’t emerged he’d have happily kept on lying.
Was he unaware that there was a recording? All seems bizarre to me...
Yup.
He’s created the precedent for Corbyn and McDonnell to lie and smear the civil service with impugnity if they ever get into power.
The Tory Brexit loons have enabled Corbyn and McDonnell. They showed that Cake and Eat It, Project Fear works brilliantly as an electoral strategy, and that attacking long-standing British institutions - Parliament, the courts, the civil service, the BBC, etc - as enemies of the people can be a very successful and destructive strategy.
The origins of this go back to the ridiculous project fear followed by remain in the referendum campaign and then of course by Trump and fake news.
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
And the Chinese, people who take the long view, have no particular interest in helping us off the hook. Over the 19th and much of the 20th Centuries we did them no particular favours.
Getting people to turn out at minor elections is the biggest issue with democratic accountability. Ten times more important that who is or who is not allowed to vote. This really bothers me. Instinctively I don't like the Australian compulsion but what are the alternatives ?
I am greatly against compulsion to vote unless either the penalty was low (fat chance) or
One of my electors thinks no-one should be elected without the votes of say 35% of the eligible electorate. - there would soon be no councillors if that were to be enforced I think.
A none of the above option is a must if there is a compulsion to vote. That way if NOTA wins then all the candidates are disqualified from the re-run.
NotA / RON should really be an option for all elections. It gives the power to the electorate to overturn the party nomination in safe seats.
@MatthewOToole2: Close reading of PM's answers to @bbclaura would lead you to conclude she wasn't fudging, she was describing a harder deal, at least for the purposes of ERG ears. She didn't say deep&special, she said a tariff free trade deal which was frictionless *as possible*. That's Canada.
Getting people to turn out at minor elections is the biggest issue with democratic accountability. Ten times more important that who is or who is not allowed to vote. This really bothers me. Instinctively I don't like the Australian compulsion but what are the alternatives ?
I am greatly against compulsion to vote unless either the penalty was low (fat chance) or
One of my electors thinks no-one should be elected without the votes of say 35% of the eligible electorate. - there would soon be no councillors if that were to be enforced I think.
A none of the above option is a must if there is a compulsion to vote. That way if NOTA wins then all the candidates are disqualified from the re-run.
NotA / RON should really be an option for all elections. It gives the power to the electorate to overturn the party nomination in safe seats.
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
And the Chinese, people who take the long view, have no particular interest in helping us off the hook. Over the 19th and much of the 20th Centuries we did them no particular favours.
To get a trade deal with China we will need to offer the Chinese more than they get from us now. It's that simple. One thing we can do is stay absolutely silent about human rights.
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
Whether we are in or out of the EU we need to develop our markets in the far east where the growth will come from. A report on business news said that Trump is going to pump trillions into the US economy and that the benefits will be felt in the pacific and asia and that is where the business is going to be in the future.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
" The DUP expect her to deliver on the referendum result to free us from the dead hand of the single market, the protectionist policies of the customs union, the money grabbing hands of the EU commission, and the interference of the European Court. Our commitment to support the government requires delivery on these issues which the majority of the UK population voted for."
@MatthewOToole2: Close reading of PM's answers to @bbclaura would lead you to conclude she wasn't fudging, she was describing a harder deal, at least for the purposes of ERG ears. She didn't say deep&special, she said a tariff free trade deal which was frictionless *as possible*. That's Canada.
Sounds like that interview is similar to her views on Sky
" The DUP expect her to deliver on the referendum result to free us from the dead hand of the single market, the protectionist policies of the customs union, the money grabbing hands of the EU commission, and the interference of the European Court. Our commitment to support the government requires delivery on these issues which the majority of the UK population voted for."
Getting people to turn out at minor elections is the biggest issue with democratic accountability. Ten times more important that who is or who is not allowed to vote. This really bothers me. Instinctively I don't like the Australian compulsion but what are the alternatives ?
I am greatly against compulsion to vote unless either the penalty was low (fat chance) or
One of my electors thinks no-one should be elected without the votes of say 35% of the eligible electorate. - there would soon be no councillors if that were to be enforced I think.
A none of the above option is a must if there is a compulsion to vote. That way if NOTA wins then all the candidates are disqualified from the re-run.
NotA / RON should really be an option for all elections. It gives the power to the electorate to overturn the party nomination in safe seats.
STV gives a similar option.
... without the hassle and expense of getting the people to vote twice. I wouldn't object to NotA being added for the case when all of the candidates were so bad that it was useful.
@MatthewOToole2: Close reading of PM's answers to @bbclaura would lead you to conclude she wasn't fudging, she was describing a harder deal, at least for the purposes of ERG ears. She didn't say deep&special, she said a tariff free trade deal which was frictionless *as possible*. That's Canada.
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
Whether we are in or out of the EU we need to develop our markets in the far east where the growth will come from. A report on business news said that Trump is going to pump trillions into the US economy and that the benefits will be felt in the pacific and asia and that is where the business is going to be in the future.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
The trade was done long before this week's trip. Global Britain will only succeed in China if it stays absolutely quiet about human rights, Hong Kong and anything else that the Chinese government finds uncomfortable to speak about publicly. On top of that, we are also going to have to give the Chinese a lot more access to UK markets than they have at the moment if we want a deal. As with the EU, we will end up with what they want to give us. But because there is no independent judiciary it will be less certain as it will always be subject to the whims of the regime and the internal machinations of the Communist party.
Golly, things move fast, I thought it was Finnieston. A couple of years ago the Graun was trying to punt 'Glasgow Southside' (a name that has never been applied to The Southside) as cooler than cool.
I look forward to the day when Possil becomes hipster heaven.
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
Whether we are in or out of the EU we need to develop our markets in the far east where the growth will come from. A report on business news said that Trump is going to pump trillions into the US economy and that the benefits will be felt in the pacific and asia and that is where the business is going to be in the future.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
The trade was done long before this week's trip. Global Britain will only succeed in China if it stays absolutely quiet about human rights, Hong Kong and anything else that the Chinese government finds uncomfortable to speak about publicly. On top of that, we are also going to have to give the Chinese a lot more access to UK markets than they have at the moment if we want a deal. As with the EU, we will end up with what they want to give us. But because there is no independent judiciary it will be less certain as it will always be subject to the whims of the regime and the internal machinations of the Communist party.
Fascinating thing, life.
As a colonial power we look back at history in horror and shame at the imposition of our law, authority and will, at the exploitation and domination of peoples and at the cultural vandalism committed against the poor colonies.
As a 21st centaury trading partner we need to impose our ethics, morals and human rights on our trading partners or deny them the goods and services we produce that could improve their lives.
I wonder if this form of trade colonialism will be reviled by future generations.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
Whether we are in or out of the EU we need to develop our markets in the far east where the growth will come from. A report on business news said that Trump is going to pump trillions into the US economy and that the benefits will be felt in the pacific and asia and that is where the business is going to be in the future.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
The trade was done long before this week's trip....
Fascinating thing, life.
As a colonial power we look back at history in horror and shame at the imposition of our law, authority and will, at the exploitation and domination of peoples and at the cultural vandalism committed against the poor colonies.
As a 21st centaury trading partner we need to impose our ethics, morals and human rights on our trading partners or deny them the goods and services we produce that could improve their lives.
I wonder if this form of trade colonialism will be reviled by future generations.
I doubt it - the power relationship is entirely different now. We lack much of the wherewithal to 'impose' anything.
(edit... and what do centaurs have to do with it ?)
This is true - Thistle fans are known for their beard wax, quinoa pies and love of math rock - and of course the most hipster mascot in world football.
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
Whether we are in or out of the EU we need to develop our markets in the far east where the growth will come from. A report on business news said that Trump is going to pump trillions into the US economy and that the benefits will be felt in the pacific and asia and that is where the business is going to be in the future.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
The trade was done long before this week's trip....
Fascinating thing, life.
As a colonial power we look back at history in horror and shame at the imposition of our law, authority and will, at the exploitation and domination of peoples and at the cultural vandalism committed against the poor colonies.
As a 21st centaury trading partner we need to impose our ethics, morals and human rights on our trading partners or deny them the goods and services we produce that could improve their lives.
I wonder if this form of trade colonialism will be reviled by future generations.
I doubt it - the power relationship is entirely different now. We lack much of the wherewithal to 'impose' anything.
(edit... and what do centaurs have to do with it ?)
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
Well that's the end of the defense industry, new rail projects, new motorways, new hospitals, new bridges, new urban regeneration projects, etc, etc, etc...
Any large infrastructure project takes longer than the term of a government or a council. Not to mention that your suggestion would not enable a governing body to do *anything* other than repaint a playground in the final year in office.
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
And the Chinese, people who take the long view, have no particular interest in helping us off the hook. Over the 19th and much of the 20th Centuries we did them no particular favours.
To get a trade deal with China we will need to offer the Chinese more than they get from us now. It's that simple. One thing we can do is stay absolutely silent about human rights.
The group with most to complain about in China are muslims in the Xinjiang autonomous region - some startling events and conditions there.
Whether it is the Uk's place to lead the way on this topic is debatable.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
Well that's the end of the defense industry, new rail projects, new motorways, new hospitals, new bridges, new urban regeneration projects, etc, etc, etc...
Any large infrastructure project takes longer than the term of a government or a council. Not to mention that your suggestion would not enable a governing body to do *anything* other than repaint a playground in the final year in office.
i understand the point about big infrastructure projects, but there has to be a balance between 'getting stuff done' and local democratic accountability. Otherwise we might as well end elected councils and just hand it over to the civil service.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
Well that's the end of the defense industry, new rail projects, new motorways, new hospitals, new bridges, new urban regeneration projects, etc, etc, etc...
Any large infrastructure project takes longer than the term of a government or a council. Not to mention that your suggestion would not enable a governing body to do *anything* other than repaint a playground in the final year in office.
i understand the point about big infrastructure projects, but there has to be a balance between 'getting stuff done' and local democratic accountability. Otherwise we might as well end elected councils and just hand it over to the civil service.
Grit the roads, fill the potholes and collect the bins should be about the limit of council services.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
Well that's the end of the defense industry, new rail projects, new motorways, new hospitals, new bridges, new urban regeneration projects, etc, etc, etc...
Any large infrastructure project takes longer than the term of a government or a council. Not to mention that your suggestion would not enable a governing body to do *anything* other than repaint a playground in the final year in office.
i understand the point about big infrastructure projects, but there has to be a balance between 'getting stuff done' and local democratic accountability. Otherwise we might as well end elected councils and just hand it over to the civil service.
I agree that 20+ years seems like a long time for a local housing project! There's a good thread by a councillor trying to explain the reasons behind the scheme. It makes a lot of sense to me, with the project driven by what could be done, rather than what ideologically should be done. https://twitter.com/joedgoldberg/status/959057248029986816
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
Ah yes, the Sheffield trees. That one makes no sense at all. As you say, the wrong things are getting prioritised. Sheffield should be more interested in getting HS2 built and sorting the Meadowhall traffic out.
(Around 10% of the earth's biomass burned as a result.)
A 62m sized object impact caused more biomass burning than the 10-15 km sized Chicxulub impact? Was Superman pushing it?
Guess it depends where it hit. Chicxulub impact was in shallow water, with little biomass to the north (texan desert, not that it was called texas then!) and I don't think central America existed at all. Not sure how the angle of impact would affect the debris zone; would a shallow angle result in a larger areas being covered in hot ejecta?
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
e.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
The trade was done long before this week's trip. Global Britain will only succeed in China if it stays absolutely quiet about human rights, Hong Kong and anything else that the Chinese government finds uncomfortable to speak about publicly. On top of that, we are also going to have to give the Chinese a lot more access to UK markets than they have at the moment if we want a deal. As with the EU, we will end up with what they want to give us. But because there is no independent judiciary it will be less certain as it will always be subject to the whims of the regime and the internal machinations of the Communist party.
Fascinating thing, life.
As a colonial power we look back at history in horror and shame at the imposition of our law, authority and will, at the exploitation and domination of peoples and at the cultural vandalism committed against the poor colonies.
As a 21st centaury trading partner we need to impose our ethics, morals and human rights on our trading partners or deny them the goods and services we produce that could improve their lives.
I wonder if this form of trade colonialism will be reviled by future generations.
The two are hardly equivalent - but I’d guess on it going the other way actually. If China ends up democratising and adopting more liberal values - their new leaders may point out that the West was supportive of past dictators and hypocritical on human rights.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
Ah yes, the Sheffield trees. That one makes no sense at all. As you say, the wrong things are getting prioritised. Sheffield should be more interested in getting HS2 built and sorting the Meadowhall traffic out.
The parkway is worse now actually. Google maps always advises to miss that - heading in via J34 M1 or ratrunning through the Manor/Attercliffe are both quicker (I work between the town centre and Meadowhall).
Please, please, please can we have a trade deal. Any kind will do. Oh, pretty please. Please, please, please. We're desperate.
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
Whether we are in or out of the EU we need to develop our markets in the far east where the growth will come from. A report on business news said that Trump is going to pump trillions into the US economy and that the benefits will be felt in the pacific and asia and that is where the business is going to be in the future.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
The trade was done long before this week's trip....
Fascinating thing, life.
As a colonial power we look back at history in horror and shame at the imposition of our law, authority and will, at the exploitation and domination of peoples and at the cultural vandalism committed against the poor colonies.
As a 21st centaury trading partner we need to impose our ethics, morals and human rights on our trading partners or deny them the goods and services we produce that could improve their lives.
I wonder if this form of trade colonialism will be reviled by future generations.
I doubt it - the power relationship is entirely different now. We lack much of the wherewithal to 'impose' anything.
(edit... and what do centaurs have to do with it ?)
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
Ah yes, the Sheffield trees. That one makes no sense at all. As you say, the wrong things are getting prioritised. Sheffield should be more interested in getting HS2 built and sorting the Meadowhall traffic out.
Opening Ikea right next door to Meadowhall was a courageous decision.
This is true - Thistle fans are known for their beard wax, quinoa pies and love of math rock - and of course the most hipster mascot in world football.
For the benefit of readers, Thistle is a reference to Partick Thistle Football Club, or Partick Thistle FC.
Many people wrongly think they are actually called Partick Thistle Nil...
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
It could be a massive boon to the Tories if Momentum started running a few councils. If we look at what happened when the Greens ran Brighton, a few hard left councils could be a massive stick to beat Corbyn with.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
Ah yes, the Sheffield trees. That one makes no sense at all. As you say, the wrong things are getting prioritised. Sheffield should be more interested in getting HS2 built and sorting the Meadowhall traffic out.
Opening Ikea right next door to Meadowhall was a courageous decision.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
Ah yes, the Sheffield trees. That one makes no sense at all. As you say, the wrong things are getting prioritised. Sheffield should be more interested in getting HS2 built and sorting the Meadowhall traffic out.
Opening Ikea right next door to Meadowhall was a courageous decision.
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
Ah yes, the Sheffield trees. That one makes no sense at all. As you say, the wrong things are getting prioritised. Sheffield should be more interested in getting HS2 built and sorting the Meadowhall traffic out.
I saw that the workmen were thought to have been poisoned by locals, offering them cups of tea....
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
The opposite is also a massive problem, with decisions on necessary key projects like runways and railways continually postponed because of political unpopularity.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
When you're pissing the money away on a crap tree contract like Sheffield has done recently, well you'll struggle for the important stuff.
Ah yes, the Sheffield trees. That one makes no sense at all. As you say, the wrong things are getting prioritised. Sheffield should be more interested in getting HS2 built and sorting the Meadowhall traffic out.
Opening Ikea right next door to Meadowhall was a courageous decision.
Funny how we're suddenly hearing a lot from Dr Fox.
Wonder if he's getting ready to have a run as PM?
Not that incredible..... with the current omnifuckup that pretends to be a Tory Govt anything that has some limbs and can sit up straight should be considered as a potential leader....
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
Apart from the arguement it doesn't respect the referendum result? Hence causing the public to lose all faith in the current parties?
No one seems to factor in the fact, when looking at the 2017 election, that on every single occasion since we became a democracy, when a prime minister who already had a working majority called an election before 4 years had passed, the government lost that election. Its true of Baldwin in 1923, its true of Attlee in 1951, its true of Heath in 1974. (Doesnt apply to Wilson in 1966 and October 1974, because he did not have a working majority on either occasion) And its true of May, although she actually did better than her predecessors by staying in power afterwards.
Its almost as if the electorate resents the opportunism of an unnecessary election soon after the last, and deliberately sets out to reverse the result of the last poll.
May might have suffered the same fate as Heath if there had been a been a better Labour leader. We might have prime minister Burnham now.
The 2017 election might even have done the Tories a favour by preserving Corbyn as Labour leader until the 2022 election.
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
If the Government doesn't do anything at all we get the No Deal option. Everything else requires some kind of reaction. Canada (your "Hard Brexit") is the receding horizon option. Negotiations will drag on (and can be extended) forever, during which time you never need to commit to a particular set of trade-offs (the ideal Theresa May option). Thing is, there are cliff edges along the way and we will either be in WTO or vassal state, at the whim of the EU, until we (don't) get there. Not a good option for people worried about uncertainty and want to put this whole mess to bed - ie most of the country. Nevertheless if the Govt wants to go down this route, it is difficult to stop it.
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
If the Government doesn't do anything at all we get the No Deal option. Everything else requires some kind of reaction. Canada (your "Hard Brexit") is the receding horizon option. Negotiations will drag on (and can be extended) forever, during which time you never need to commit to a particular set of trade-offs (the ideal Theresa May option). Thing is, there are cliff edges along the way and we will either be in WTO or vassal state, at the whim of the EU, until we (don't) get there. Not a good option for people worried about uncertainty and want to put this whole mess to bed - ie most of the country. Nevertheless if the Govt wants to go down this route, it is difficult to stop it.
But you're right. If you eliminate NO deal as bad, Canada as impractical and EU membership as divisive, you end up with Norway by elimination.
Need a team that can successfully repackage hard right bigotry and racism that would make a Kipper blush? Applications in writing to: 67 Northumberland St, Edinburgh EH3 6JG (green ink accepted, though not required if sectarian sensibilities are offended).
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
If the Government doesn't do anything at all we get the No Deal option. Everything else requires some kind of reaction. Canada (your "Hard Brexit") is the receding horizon option. Negotiations will drag on (and can be extended) forever, during which time you never need to commit to a particular set of trade-offs (the ideal Theresa May option). Thing is, there are cliff edges along the way and we will either be in WTO or vassal state, at the whim of the EU, until we (don't) get there. Not a good option for people worried about uncertainty and want to put this whole mess to bed - ie most of the country. Nevertheless if the Govt wants to go down this route, it is difficult to stop it.
But you're right. If you eliminate NO deal as bad, Canada as impractical and EU membership as divisive, you end up with Norway by elimination.
Rees-Mogg speaks for England on Norway: "The British people did not vote for that. They didn't vote for management of decline."
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
Neither Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn are leading their parties to that destination. For the Norway option to command majority support in the Commons would require a majority of Labour and Tory MPs to defy their party leadership.
Perhaps if Osborne was still in the Commons, and prepared to work closely with a similarly major figure on the Labour backbenches we might see such a rupture in the party loyalties to rival that over Ireland. Perhaps if Corbyn wasn't Labour leader and the Opposition were making the case for the Norway option it could happen.
So, despite the numbers, it isn't going to happen.
From my point of view it's a little bit tragic that Corbyn's most decisive impact on British politics will be to ensure a hard Brexit. I assume that the thanks of the Tory right and Farage are in the post.
Second council result, with a rather different outcome to Sunderland:
Falmouth Smithwick (Cornwall)
Labour hold
Labour: 60.2 per cent (+19.9)
Conservative: 17.2 per cent (-7.2)
Lib Dems: 17.2 per cent (-1.7)
Greens: 5.3 per cent (-11)
I don't think one can read that much into either, except that great local campaigning works, especially in January...
Campaigning does matter but that of itself implies that parties' core votes continue to dwindle as voters who once voted the same way every time look for and find other options (or perhaps, more accurately, the voters don't look for them as such but when other parties insist on being looked at, the voters not only take notice but are increasingly prepare to support them).
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
If the Government doesn't do anything at all we get the No Deal option. Everything else requires some kind of reaction. Canada (your "Hard Brexit") is the receding horizon option. Negotiations will drag on (and can be extended) forever, during which time you never need to commit to a particular set of trade-offs (the ideal Theresa May option). Thing is, there are cliff edges along the way and we will either be in WTO or vassal state, at the whim of the EU, until we (don't) get there. Not a good option for people worried about uncertainty and want to put this whole mess to bed - ie most of the country. Nevertheless if the Govt wants to go down this route, it is difficult to stop it.
But you're right. If you eliminate NO deal as bad, Canada as impractical and EU membership as divisive, you end up with Norway by elimination.
Rees-Mogg speaks for England on Norway: "The British people did not vote for that. They didn't vote for management of decline."
Will you tell Mr Rees-Mogg or will I?
Right now I would settle for managed decline. Rather than the mismanaged sort.
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
Those opposing the government and unhappy at Brexit are making exactly the same mistake the Brexiteers made before the referendum - not working out and agreeing what they actually want that is different from the Canada Plus Plus deal which the UK government has clearly* stated is its goal. Some want to remain in the EU, although who knows on what terms. Some want EEA/Norway, i.e. Single Market but not Customs Union, and no control on freedom of movement. Some want a referendum on an option which might not exist. Some seem to just want the whole issue to go away. Some are just causing trouble for the sake of it. The Labour Party is all over the place, with Corbyn seeming to want the same as Theresa May, Starmer wanting a mythical Single Market + Customs Union but no freedom of movement fantasy, and the membership mostly wanting to Remain.
If I were to proffer advice to this disparate bunch, I would recommend that they coalesce around one option, namely to remain in the Customs Union (or 'a' Customs Union) but not the Single Market, i.e. roughly the Turkey option. That would minimise trade damage, minimise disruption, solve the Irish border problem, and would be consistent with the referendum vote which was largely about controlling immigration. The downside would be that we couldn't negotiate our own trade deals, and that Liam Fox would be out of a job. I dare say the country could bear the latter blow with fortitude.
This advice, excellent though it is, will not be followed.
* (As an aside, I'm baffled by the frequent criticism that Theresa May has been unclear - she's been very clear. The uncertainty is entirely because the EU has so far refused to discuss the future relationship).
From my point of view it's a little bit tragic that Corbyn's most decisive impact on British politics will be to ensure a hard Brexit. I assume that the thanks of the Tory right and Farage are in the post. .............................................
Any New Labour figure would have just signed sealed and delivered hard Brexit for the Tories, though they would have given plenty of false platitudes such as scoring the EU 10/10, which would have convinced probably nobody, maybe even a worse result?
New Labour probably helped build the leave movement, the Labour end of it anyway. If you really want to blame someone, blame the press for not giving Corbyn's EU campaign more coverage.
He clearly has sway with a lot of voters, unfortunately, though somewhat amusingly considering how much they are upset about it, the media cut off an avenue for convincing a lot more people to vote remain.
Unfortunately for the remain campaign there were no kind of broadcasting rules which meant giving time to Corbyn in the same way they had to in the general election campaign.
....................................... Wouldn't happen if I were in charge. ......................................
A dictatorship could be much more effective, just need to find someone infallible now...
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
Those opposing the government and unhappy at Brexit are making exactly the same mistake the Brexiteers made before the referendum - not working out and agreeing what they actually want that is different from the Canada Plus Plus deal which the UK government has clearly* stated is its goal. Some want to remain in the EU, although who knows on what terms. Some want EEA/Norway, i.e. Single Market but not Customs Union, and no control on freedom of movement. Some want a referendum on an option which might not exist. Some seem to just want the whole issue to go away. Some are just causing trouble for the sake of it. The Labour Party is all over the place, with Corbyn seeming to want the same as Theresa May, Starmer wanting a mythical Single Market + Customs Union but no freedom of movement fantasy, and the membership mostly wanting to Remain.
If I were to proffer advice to this disparate bunch, I would recommend that they coalesce around one option, namely to remain in the Customs Union (or 'a' Customs Union) but not the Single Market, i.e. roughly the Turkey option. That would minimise trade damage, minimise disruption, solve the Irish border problem, and would be consistent with the referendum vote which was largely about controlling immigration. The downside would be that we couldn't negotiate our own trade deals, and that Liam Fox would be out of a job. I dare say the country could bear the latter blow with fortitude.
This advice, excellent though it is, will not be followed.
* (As an aside, I'm baffled by the frequent criticism that Theresa May has been unclear - she's been very clear. The uncertainty is entirely because so far the EU has so far refused to discuss the future relationship).
This is excellent stuff. You're back to the same mode you were in before the referendum of pompously telling the other side where they were going wrong.
It's the clearest sign yet that those opposing Brexit are winning and the government's position is poised to collapse.
I'm trying to get my head around this Brexit nonsense. Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum. A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
Those opposing the government and unhappy at Brexit are making exactly the same mistake the Brexiteers made before the referendum
They didn't make any mistake whatsoever. They won.
They are fighting the wrong battle. We have to drive into the wall because they were told to by the public. Them's the rules.
But they allowed the narrative of "SM/CU isn't leaving" to take hold. They should have jumped on that instantly and reframed the debate.
Now we are almost too late as even dolts on internet chatrooms are parroting the "SM/CU isn't leaving" idea.
Not if someone has the good sense to point out the public that this wall looks kind of hard, and asks them to decide again between the brake and the accelerator?
As an aside, I'm baffled by the frequent criticism that Theresa May has been unclear - she's been very clear.
She wants Unicorns and Rainbows.
The lack of clarity is her ability to distinguish reality from fantasy
Not so. She's been 100% clear that we won't be in the SIngle Market and Customs Union, and that within those parameters she wants as comprehensive a trade deal as we can get, with the aim of a deal closer than Canada's. How on earth can anyone claim that is unreasonable or unclear? Of course we can't say for sure how much of deal better than Canada's we can get, which causes uncertainty, but the blame for that uncertainty lies squarely with the EU, who for over a year have refused to discuss the future relationship. It's bonkers to blame Theresa May for that, but hopefully the lumbering EU bureaucracy will start discussing the main issue soon.
Comments
The aim of the next EU treaty will be to combine the single market with the main TFEU - at which point the EEA will be redundant to the EU nations. So if we go to the EEA either via EFTA or as a shadow agreement, we must almost immediately begin to prepare for the process of leaving it just in case the EU roll it up.
Now the genie is out there is no putting it back
Global Britain.
Makes you proud.
You need to widen your vision and 9 billion of trade done this week supports British jobs. Human rights is important but it needs to be achieved through quiet diplomacy
" The DUP expect her to deliver on the referendum result to free us from the dead hand of the single market, the protectionist policies of the customs union, the money grabbing hands of the EU commission, and the interference of the European Court. Our commitment to support the government requires delivery on these issues which the majority of the UK population voted for."
Read more at: https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/sammy-wilson-dup-s-commitment-to-back-pm-requires-delivery-on-full-brexit-1-8357579 "
https://twitter.com/jake_bittle/status/958830560603987968
I look forward to the day when Possil becomes hipster heaven.
As a colonial power we look back at history in horror and shame at the imposition of our law, authority and will, at the exploitation and domination of peoples and at the cultural vandalism committed against the poor colonies.
As a 21st centaury trading partner we need to impose our ethics, morals and human rights on our trading partners or deny them the goods and services we produce that could improve their lives.
I wonder if this form of trade colonialism will be reviled by future generations.
https://www.newstatesman.com/2018/01/local-people-stopped-haringey-development-vehicle-now-its-time-unity
I think councils be they Haringey with the HDV or Sheffield with the Amey highways deal, are being totally undemocratic by signing 20+ year contracts to outsource and privatise services. What is the point of voting in councillors if they can do nothing to change what previous elected officials have signed up for?
(edit... and what do centaurs have to do with it ?)
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/695703
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/695704
(Around 10% of the earth's biomass burned as a result.)
Any large infrastructure project takes longer than the term of a government or a council. Not to mention that your suggestion would not enable a governing body to do *anything* other than repaint a playground in the final year in office.
Whether it is the Uk's place to lead the way on this topic is debatable.
Not to mention health and social care, pensions etc which keep getting talked about rather than implemented.
https://twitter.com/joedgoldberg/status/959057248029986816
If China ends up democratising and adopting more liberal values - their new leaders may point out that the West was supportive of past dictators and hypocritical on human rights.
Wonder if he's getting ready to have a run as PM?
Many people wrongly think they are actually called Partick Thistle Nil...
H/T The Big Yin
Nah, still quite clement weather conditions in Hell.....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/26/police-investigate-poisoned-tea-plot-workmen-chopping-trees/
1) Adam
2) Werritty
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15913019.Orange_Order_to_launch__charm_offensive__in_response_to_negative_media_coverage/?ref=mr&lp=8
Imbruglia
Considering the arithmetic of the HoC, our negotiating position etc.....there is only one possible fudge available.....a deal that keeps us in the EU in all but name that will be passed by the plurality of our Parliament who generally want to put this sorry and shameful episode behind us without a further election or the need for a second divisive referendum.
No deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
A hard Brexit deal would not be approved by the HoC, bring down the Govt and would lead to a second referendum.
These are the numbers Osbo was alluding too yesterday. A fudge is the only way forward if the Tory party wants to remain in Govt.......or am I missing something blindingly obvious?
Its almost as if the electorate resents the opportunism of an unnecessary election soon after the last, and deliberately sets out to reverse the result of the last poll.
May might have suffered the same fate as Heath if there had been a been a better Labour leader. We might have prime minister Burnham now.
The 2017 election might even have done the Tories a favour by preserving Corbyn as Labour leader until the 2022 election.
Falmouth Smithwick (Cornwall)
Labour hold
Labour: 60.2 per cent (+19.9)
Conservative: 17.2 per cent (-7.2)
Lib Dems: 17.2 per cent (-1.7)
Greens: 5.3 per cent (-11)
I don't think one can read that much into either, except that great local campaigning works, especially in January...
There’s a great advantage when your father’s a doctor.
Edit: I see it's 'non' corbyn led...well indeed, but that's hardly on the cards.
Wouldn't happen if I were in charge.
Perhaps if Osborne was still in the Commons, and prepared to work closely with a similarly major figure on the Labour backbenches we might see such a rupture in the party loyalties to rival that over Ireland. Perhaps if Corbyn wasn't Labour leader and the Opposition were making the case for the Norway option it could happen.
So, despite the numbers, it isn't going to happen.
From my point of view it's a little bit tragic that Corbyn's most decisive impact on British politics will be to ensure a hard Brexit. I assume that the thanks of the Tory right and Farage are in the post.
Right now I would settle for managed decline. Rather than the mismanaged sort.
But they allowed the narrative of "SM/CU isn't leaving" to take hold. They should have jumped on that instantly and reframed the debate.
Now we are almost too late as even dolts on internet chatrooms are parroting the "SM/CU isn't leaving" idea.
If I were to proffer advice to this disparate bunch, I would recommend that they coalesce around one option, namely to remain in the Customs Union (or 'a' Customs Union) but not the Single Market, i.e. roughly the Turkey option. That would minimise trade damage, minimise disruption, solve the Irish border problem, and would be consistent with the referendum vote which was largely about controlling immigration. The downside would be that we couldn't negotiate our own trade deals, and that Liam Fox would be out of a job. I dare say the country could bear the latter blow with fortitude.
This advice, excellent though it is, will not be followed.
* (As an aside, I'm baffled by the frequent criticism that Theresa May has been unclear - she's been very clear. The uncertainty is entirely because the EU has so far refused to discuss the future relationship).
The lack of clarity is her ability to distinguish reality from fantasy
.............................................
Any New Labour figure would have just signed sealed and delivered hard Brexit for the Tories, though they would have given plenty of false platitudes such as scoring the EU 10/10, which would have convinced probably nobody, maybe even a worse result?
New Labour probably helped build the leave movement, the Labour end of it anyway. If you really want to blame someone, blame the press for not giving Corbyn's EU campaign more coverage.
He clearly has sway with a lot of voters, unfortunately, though somewhat amusingly considering how much they are upset about it, the media cut off an avenue for convincing a lot more people to vote remain.
Unfortunately for the remain campaign there were no kind of broadcasting rules which meant giving time to Corbyn in the same way they had to in the general election campaign.
.......................................
Wouldn't happen if I were in charge.
......................................
A dictatorship could be much more effective, just need to find someone infallible now...
It's the clearest sign yet that those opposing Brexit are winning and the government's position is poised to collapse.