Quick on topic comment. Mike is right - the local elections will matter more than usual because May is more vulnerable than PMs usually are. However, setting the bar at last year's score is worthy of a Lib Dem bar chart.
No government has made gains in a non-GE year since the 1980s; the normal course of events is that opposition parties use local elections to extract free hits on unpopular aspects of the government. Even William Hague and IDS made good gains (and not only because Hague was coming off the disastrous Tory results of the mid-1990s; they were respectable in terms of vote share too).
The risk for May is that the media narrative is set before the polls and is undisturbed by (and despite) them. This happened to IDS, who all the political correspondents and commentators decided was useless and needed to go, and who stuck to that narrative even though he made good gains in 2002 and 2003 (and to be fair, it was right).
So with May - particularly as her own media team is, like her, far too defensive and incapable of setting the agenda and expectations.
If current polling is reliable - and local by-elections suggest it is - then Labour probably leads by a head. That won't be directly fed into England-wide results, which are London-heavy in this round and which, as such, favour Labour. All the same, the UKIP seats up for grabs and the implicit current slight Lab-to-Con in England-outside-London since 2014 should mean relatively small net Con losses overall.
If so, that'll bolster her position for a few days. But then comes the Customs Union vote, which is of far more importance to her future.
The current sweet spot in politics is offering the least extreme version of Brexit. The facts about what is actually feasible aren't very important. The details of the offer aren't important at all.
Corbyn doesn't give a fuck about Brexit one way or the other. If it takes a soft creamy, essentially pointless, Brexit to get May out of No. 10 and him into it, that's what he'll do.
I think he does because of the restrictions the EU would put on his policies
His only motivation right now is inflicting a Parliamentary defeat on the government.
If the changes between 2013 and 2017 were carried on, the PNV would be Con 44%, Lab 29%, Lib Dem 17%, UKIP 4% (a Con lead of 15%) therefore it could be argued that a Con lead of 15% would be in line with 2017, so anything less than that would a swing to Lab relative to 2017
The current sweet spot in politics is offering the least extreme version of Brexit. The facts about what is actually feasible aren't very important. The details of the offer aren't important at all.
Yet all the big political brains on PB can't seem to grasp this simple fact.
Possibly you were still swinging in your hammock when I posted this at the crack of dawn:
"Because Labour's research reckons that Labour Leavers are soft Leavers whose party loyalty trumps European issues, and the DNVers who turned out for EUref won't bother in a GE.
He's looking to bring down May's administration. In fairness, it would be a mercy killing.
Politically it's quite clever, and I think it's worth the gamble. Muggles won't be paying attention anyway. "
All he really needs is a 15 second clip of him saying 'SOFT BREXIT SOFT BREXIT TORIES BAD NHS' for the Twitterati and he's measuring up the curtains for Downing street.
Sadly, there’s a large group of influential people who seem determined to make [Brexit] a disaster.
That would be the current govt....
Where is my hat & coat?
If you say so!
I think JRM and Dan Hannan are getting a little fed up with being the only positive voices in the media on Brexit. If people don’t want it to be a success then that’s never going to happen.
Current govt policy, or rather the total lack of it, does not look to be building a path to a successful Brexit. It is not even going to be a successful rescue of the Conservative Party which appears to have been the whole idea in the first place.
Brexit has always been destined to be a shambles. It divided the country which is not a good position for any policy to start from.
Brexit didn't divide the country, our EU membership did. The country was already divided - you just notice it more now that you're on the wrong side of the divide.
There’ll be no FTA with the US unless the Irish border question is resolved with Ireland’s agreement. There is no way to get a deal through Congress if it is opposed by the Irish American lobby.
Why would we want an FTA with the USA? The balance of UK/USA trade is currently in our favour. If we agreed an FTA they would want that redressed. We would be worse off.
The danger for Corbyn is that he angers the remainers in his party by not committing to the single market and angers leavers as staying in a customs union negates so many trade options and is not going to provide a clean break
Barry Gardiner all over the place on the media this morning and Corbyns decision has opened more questions than answers for him.
Also by speaking today it provides 5 days for TM to fine tune her big speech on friday
Corbyns decision has probably caused labour damage in leave areas
How do you mean fine tune ? I thought the policy had been decided .Mays position is to leave the single market and the customs union.At a time to be decided after a transition implementation period.
Let's see what she says on friday - it may well be more nuanced
"I have decided we will pursue the little bit pregnant strategy for Brexit."
Sadly, there’s a large group of influential people who seem determined to make [Brexit] a disaster.
That would be the current govt....
Where is my hat & coat?
If you say so!
I think JRM and Dan Hannan are getting a little fed up with being the only positive voices in the media on Brexit. If people don’t want it to be a success then that’s never going to happen.
Current govt policy, or rather the total lack of it, does not look to be building a path to a successful Brexit. It is not even going to be a successful rescue of the Conservative Party which appears to have been the whole idea in the first place.
Brexit has always been destined to be a shambles. It divided the country which is not a good position for any policy to start from.
Brexit didn't divide the country, our EU membership did. The country was already divided - you just notice it more now that you're on the wrong side of the divide.
Maybe so.
No you were right in the first place! The Referendum campaign created a dislike of the EU that many didn't realise they had.
The Referendum was designed to resolve the divisions in the Conservative Party. The result didn't go to plan, so that remains work in progress! The collateral damage created 'Leavers' and 'Remainers'. You hadn't heard much about those factions before the EU campaign!
He’s currently whingeing about the terrible Tories in his usual nasal way, but when he says it’s been 20 months and the government is still all over the shop, he’s not wrong, is he?
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
The current sweet spot in politics is offering the least extreme version of Brexit. The facts about what is actually feasible aren't very important. The details of the offer aren't important at all.
Yet all the big political brains on PB can't seem to grasp this simple fact.
Possibly you were still swinging in your hammock when I posted this at the crack of dawn:
"Because Labour's research reckons that Labour Leavers are soft Leavers whose party loyalty trumps European issues, and the DNVers who turned out for EUref won't bother in a GE.
He's looking to bring down May's administration. In fairness, it would be a mercy killing.
Politically it's quite clever, and I think it's worth the gamble. Muggles won't be paying attention anyway. "
All he really needs is a 15 second clip of him saying 'SOFT BREXIT SOFT BREXIT TORIES BAD NHS' for the Twitterati and he's measuring up the curtains for Downing street.
Yours is of course not a big political PB brain, it is a ginormous political PB brain.
I get the feeling that a lot of PB Leavers are desperately hoping Jezza will stick to his ideological roots, thus eschewing any hint of compromise or political ambition; he is no doubt a duffer, but not that much of a duffer.
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
Disagree.
I don’t think a single member of Cabinet has bothered to spell out some basic facts, as Corbyn does here. And many businesses have supply chains and production processes, interwoven throughout Europe. Take the UK car industry, which supports 169,000 manufacturing jobs, 52,000 of which are here in the West Midlands.
If we look at the example of one of Britain’s most iconic brands in this sector, the Mini, we begin to see how reliant our automotive industry is on a frictionless, interwoven supply chain.
A mini will cross the Channel three times in a 2,000-mile journey before the finished car rolls off the production line. Starting in Oxford it will be shipped to France to be fitted for key components before being brought back to BMW’s Hams Hall plant in Warwickshire where it is drilled and milled into shape.
Once this process is complete the mini will be sent to Munich to be fitted with its engine, before ending its journey back at the mini plant in Oxford for final assembly.
If that car is to be sold on the continent then many of its components will have crossed the Channel four times.
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
He is reading a lot of his speech and apart from the attack on the conservatives I have not heard anything that differs much from TM
If the changes between 2013 and 2017 were carried on, the PNV would be Con 44%, Lab 29%, Lib Dem 17%, UKIP 4% (a Con lead of 15%) therefore it could be argued that a Con lead of 15% would be in line with 2017, so anything less than that would a swing to Lab relative to 2017
Sadly, there’s a large group of influential people who seem determined to make [Brexit] a disaster.
That would be the current govt....
Where is my hat & coat?
If you say so!
I think JRM and Dan Hannan are getting a little fed up with being the only positive voices in the media on Brexit. If people don’t want it to be a success then that’s never going to happen.
Current govt policy, or rather the total lack of it, does not look to be building a path to a successful Brexit. It is not even going to be a successful rescue of the Conservative Party which appears to have been the whole idea in the first place.
Brexit has always been destined to be a shambles. It divided the country which is not a good position for any policy to start from.
Brexit didn't divide the country, our EU membership did. The country was already divided - you just notice it more now that you're on the wrong side of the divide.
Maybe so.
No you were right in the first place! The Referendum campaign created a dislike of the EU that many didn't realise they had.
The Referendum was designed to resolve the divisions in the Conservative Party. The result didn't go to plan, so that remains work in progress! The collateral damage created 'Leavers' and 'Remainers'. You hadn't heard much about those factions before the EU campaign!
Interestingly, the referendum also created a cohort of Euroenthusiasts amongst the previously indifferent too.
He’s currently whingeing about the terrible Tories in his usual nasal way, but when he says it’s been 20 months and the government is still all over the shop, he’s not wrong, is he?
Problem is Labour is all over the shop too. What was absolutely unacceptable weeks ago is now seemingly policy. When do they propose staying in?
The current sweet spot in politics is offering the least extreme version of Brexit. The facts about what is actually feasible aren't very important. The details of the offer aren't important at all.
Yet all the big political brains on PB can't seem to grasp this simple fact.
Possibly you were still swinging in your hammock when I posted this at the crack of dawn:
"Because Labour's research reckons that Labour Leavers are soft Leavers whose party loyalty trumps European issues, and the DNVers who turned out for EUref won't bother in a GE.
He's looking to bring down May's administration. In fairness, it would be a mercy killing.
Politically it's quite clever, and I think it's worth the gamble. Muggles won't be paying attention anyway. "
All he really needs is a 15 second clip of him saying 'SOFT BREXIT SOFT BREXIT TORIES BAD NHS' for the Twitterati and he's measuring up the curtains for Downing street.
Yours is of course not a big political PB brain, it is a ginormous political PB brain.
I get the feeling that a lot of PB Leavers are desperately hoping Jezza will stick to his ideological roots, thus eschewing any hint of compromise or political ambition; he is no doubt a duffer, but not that much of a duffer.
Unlike the Ultras I haven't forgotten our wealthy, educated and privileged minority. The result was 52:48. That means the softest, creamiest BINO. Our position can evolve from there, in either direction.
We had 25 years of the boiled frog approach. People can decry the cost, uncertainty and sheer wastefulness of doing the EU hokey cokey, but it seems to me that we have to decide, with our eyes wide open, whether we want the European project or not.
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
He is reading a lot of his speech and apart from the attack on the conservatives I have not heard anything that differs much from TM
Maybe he's "doing a Mugabe" and not reading the script Starmer gave him!
Boris Johnson considered RESIGNING during May's crunch meeting of her Brexit war cabinet at Chequers and issues new red line on diverging from EU laws.
Sadly, there’s a large group of influential people who seem determined to make [Brexit] a disaster.
That would be the current govt....
Where is my hat & coat?
If you say so!
I think JRM and Dan Hannan are getting a little fed up with being the only positive voices in the media on Brexit. If people don’t want it to be a success then that’s never going to happen.
Current govt policy, or rather the total lack of it, does not look to be building a path to a successful Brexit. It is not even going to be a successful rescue of the Conservative Party which appears to have been the whole idea in the first place.
Brexit has always been destined to be a shambles. It divided the country which is not a good position for any policy to start from.
Brexit didn't divide the country, our EU membership did. The country was already divided - you just notice it more now that you're on the wrong side of the divide.
Maybe so.
No you were right in the first place! The Referendum campaign created a dislike of the EU that many didn't realise they had.
The Referendum was designed to resolve the divisions in the Conservative Party. The result didn't go to plan, so that remains work in progress! The collateral damage created 'Leavers' and 'Remainers'. You hadn't heard much about those factions before the EU campaign!
Interestingly, the referendum also created a cohort of Euroenthusiasts amongst the previously indifferent too.
He’s currently whingeing about the terrible Tories in his usual nasal way, but when he says it’s been 20 months and the government is still all over the shop, he’s not wrong, is he?
Problem is Labour is all over the shop too. What was absolutely unacceptable weeks ago is now seemingly policy. When do they propose staying in?
They will not.
But I suspect that in due course they will offer a vote on “The Deal”. They can then continue to sound Brexity while also winning the support of Remainers desperate to relitigate the vote.
The current sweet spot in politics is offering the least extreme version of Brexit. The facts about what is actually feasible aren't very important. The details of the offer aren't important at all.
Yet all the big political brains on PB can't seem to grasp this simple fact.
Possibly you were still swinging in your hammock when I posted this at the crack of dawn:
"Because Labour's research reckons that Labour Leavers are soft Leavers whose party loyalty trumps European issues, and the DNVers who turned out for EUref won't bother in a GE.
He's looking to bring down May's administration. In fairness, it would be a mercy killing.
Politically it's quite clever, and I think it's worth the gamble. Muggles won't be paying attention anyway. "
All he really needs is a 15 second clip of him saying 'SOFT BREXIT SOFT BREXIT TORIES BAD NHS' for the Twitterati and he's measuring up the curtains for Downing street.
Yours is of course not a big political PB brain, it is a ginormous political PB brain.
I get the feeling that a lot of PB Leavers are desperately hoping Jezza will stick to his ideological roots, thus eschewing any hint of compromise or political ambition; he is no doubt a duffer, but not that much of a duffer.
Unlike the Ultras I haven't forgotten our wealthy, educated and privileged minority. The result was 52:48. That means the softest, creamiest BINO. Our position can evolve from there, in either direction.
We had 25 years of the boiled frog approach. People can decry the cost, uncertainty and sheer wastefulness of doing the EU hokey cokey, but it seems to me that we have to decide, with our eyes wide open, whether we want the European project or not.
We don't. Sadly for logic and common sense, people overlooked the clause in Dave's deal which explicitly dealt with this very issue.
But that is old news, I hope (because I don't believe in the Grand European project) that all this doesn't mean that we somehow have to rejoin without all the protections that Dave's deal would have ensured for us.
Boris Johnson considered RESIGNING during May's crunch meeting of her Brexit war cabinet at Chequers and issues new red line on diverging from EU laws.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
No we dont. Staying in the Single market would be undemocratic because it would mean the EU continuing to control our borders and laws which the British people voted to end.
And the Labour loyalists here think they have found the sweet spot?
Hur hur hur.
Yes, it's an utterly bum deal and needs to be exposed as such. Barry Gardiner is my MP, and while I never voted for him, he is one of the few politicians actually to reason with his audience. It is disappointing to see him signing up to this nonsense.
Boris Johnson considered RESIGNING during May's crunch meeting of her Brexit war cabinet at Chequers and issues new red line on diverging from EU laws.
Boris Johnson considered RESIGNING during May's crunch meeting of her Brexit war cabinet at Chequers and issues new red line on diverging from EU laws.
Boris Johnson considered RESIGNING during May's crunch meeting of her Brexit war cabinet at Chequers and issues new red line on diverging from EU laws.
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
Has he reached the bit about getting the whole of the public sector onto defined contribution pensions yet ?
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
No we dont. Staying in the Single market would be undemocratic because it would mean the EU continuing to control our borders and laws which the British people voted to end.
Jeremy Corbyn wont be prime minister.
If you don't stop your bleating I'm going to bloody well vote for Corbyn.
And the Labour loyalists here think they have found the sweet spot?
Hur hur hur.
Yes, it's an utterly bum deal and needs to be exposed as such. Barry Gardiner is my MP, and while I never voted for him, he is one of the few politicians actually to reason with his audience. It is disappointing to see him signing up to this nonsense.
Corbyn is becoming boring now - hasn't said anything much different from TM.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
It is but neither main party is backing it
You and your young equivalent HYUFD always make the mistake of taking what politicians say at face value. May has already u-turned on quite a few red lines and Labour are drifting inexorably to pushing for the softest of Brexits. It's perfectly obvious that we are going to end up with a Norway vassal state Brexit as the only workable way out of this mess.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
No we dont. Staying in the Single market would be undemocratic because it would mean the EU continuing to control our borders and laws which the British people voted to end.
Jeremy Corbyn wont be prime minister.
If you don't stop your bleating I'm going to bloody well vote for Corbyn.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
No we dont. Staying in the Single market would be undemocratic because it would mean the EU continuing to control our borders and laws which the British people voted to end.
Jeremy Corbyn wont be prime minister.
If you don't stop your bleating I'm going to bloody well vote for Corbyn.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
No we dont. Staying in the Single market would be undemocratic because it would mean the EU continuing to control our borders and laws which the British people voted to end.
Jeremy Corbyn wont be prime minister.
If you don't stop your bleating I'm going to bloody well vote for Corbyn.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
It is but neither main party is backing it
You and your young equivalent HYUFD always make the mistake of taking what politicians say at face value. May has already u-turned on quite a few red lines and Labour are drifting inexorably to pushing for the softest of Brexits. It's perfectly obvious that we are going to end up with a Norway vassal state Brexit as the only workable way out of this mess.
Never have more rightwingers been so desperate for Jeremy Corbyn to hold fast to his socialist beliefs rather than take any pragmatic steps to win the next election.
They are underestimating their enemy which, if they continue to do so, would qualify for a (the) Oscar Wilde quote.
I'd vote for whoever wants to ban world book day; or at least the bit that means that parents have to make 'outfits' for their children according to whatever the half-arsed theme is this year.
And I'm not just saying this because my arts and crafts skills are non-existent. No siree
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
It is but neither main party is backing it
You and your young equivalent HYUFD always make the mistake of taking what politicians say at face value. May has already u-turned on quite a few red lines and Labour are drifting inexorably to pushing for the softest of Brexits. It's perfectly obvious that we are going to end up with a Norway vassal state Brexit as the only workable way out of this mess.
I do not think anything is obvious at all in this mess
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
If the EU would care to compromise on free movement then that might be possible. It seems they don't.
The irony is for all the fuss about FOM no-one shows the slightest interest in limiting immigration and more than one minister has called for more in the past few weeks. Ask Theresa May what the 2010-2016 Home Secretary did to reduce non-EU immigration, for instance.
I'd vote for whoever wants to ban world book day; or at least the bit that means that parents have to make 'outfits' for their children according to whatever the half-arsed theme is this year.
And I'm not just saying this because my arts and crafts skills are non-existent. No siree
I’d like to ban kids shoes with lights in them.
Once you buy one they demand every pair of footwear have lights in them.
Membership of the EU prevents the Labour manifesto's public ownership ambition.
Not really. France has a nationalised electricity supplier called EDF. Ireland never privatised the ESB. Water in most of Europe is publicly-owned, usually by the local authority.
The EU rules out import controls or foreign exchange controls which the Labour left wanted in 1975.
The EU single market is incompatible with Labour’s manifesto Alex Gordon and J. White 9 August 2017
"EU single market membership frustrates any ability to create coherent, integrated, nationalised industries and utilities based on democratically agreed national needs."
This will be the interesting compromise. Will Lab be prepared to shelve plans to nationalise Tescos, Goldman Sachs, your local corner shop, etc if it means they can present a coherent EU strategy to voters.
(Edit: not your local corner shop, of course, because I believe you are an expat PB-er, aren't you?)
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
Yep. A few years of Corbyn, if he is restrained by single market membership and ideally the SNP/Lib Dems, is probably a price worth paying in my view if it means avoiding a Jacob Rees Mogg Brexit. If a GE is forced and Labour promise single market membership I'll be voting Labour in a GE for the first time ever.
Did jezza give his speech at an autonomous vehicle company? Cos bit ironic as he wants to ban them.
Ah, that is why he selected Coventry, the car industry. Got it. Nice idea. I had assumed he had spent the weekend chewing the fat at Dave Nellist's place.
I'd vote for whoever wants to ban world book day; or at least the bit that means that parents have to make 'outfits' for their children according to whatever the half-arsed theme is this year.
And I'm not just saying this because my arts and crafts skills are non-existent. No siree
I’d like to ban kids shoes with lights in them.
Once you buy one they demand every pair of footwear have lights in them.
I think you are just jealous that they don't do adult sized ones....
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
Disagree.
I don’t think a single member of Cabinet has bothered to spell out some basic facts, as Corbyn does here. And many businesses have supply chains and production processes, interwoven throughout Europe. Take the UK car industry, which supports 169,000 manufacturing jobs, 52,000 of which are here in the West Midlands.
If we look at the example of one of Britain’s most iconic brands in this sector, the Mini, we begin to see how reliant our automotive industry is on a frictionless, interwoven supply chain.
A mini will cross the Channel three times in a 2,000-mile journey before the finished car rolls off the production line. Starting in Oxford it will be shipped to France to be fitted for key components before being brought back to BMW’s Hams Hall plant in Warwickshire where it is drilled and milled into shape.
Once this process is complete the mini will be sent to Munich to be fitted with its engine, before ending its journey back at the mini plant in Oxford for final assembly.
If that car is to be sold on the continent then many of its components will have crossed the Channel four times.
And the Labour loyalists here think they have found the sweet spot?
Hur hur hur.
Yes, it's an utterly bum deal and needs to be exposed as such. Barry Gardiner is my MP, and while I never voted for him, he is one of the few politicians actually to reason with his audience. It is disappointing to see him signing up to this nonsense.
Corbyn is becoming boring now - hasn't said anything much different from TM.
Let us see what TM comes up with on friday
I disagree. I think it an interesting speech because it takes resolutely internationalist approach.that almost no-one on either side of the debate has followed.
I'd vote for whoever wants to ban world book day; or at least the bit that means that parents have to make 'outfits' for their children according to whatever the half-arsed theme is this year.
And I'm not just saying this because my arts and crafts skills are non-existent. No siree
I’d like to ban kids shoes with lights in them.
Once you buy one they demand every pair of footwear have lights in them.
I think you are just jealous that they don't do adult sized ones....
The current sweet spot in politics is offering the least extreme version of Brexit. The facts about what is actually feasible aren't very important. The details of the offer aren't important at all.
Yet all the big political brains on PB can't seem to grasp this simple fact.
Possibly you were still swinging in your hammock when I posted this at the crack of dawn:
"Because Labour's research reckons that Labour Leavers are soft Leavers whose party loyalty trumps European issues, and the DNVers who turned out for EUref won't bother in a GE.
He's looking to bring down May's administration. In fairness, it would be a mercy killing.
Politically it's quite clever, and I think it's worth the gamble. Muggles won't be paying attention anyway. "
All he really needs is a 15 second clip of him saying 'SOFT BREXIT SOFT BREXIT TORIES BAD NHS' for the Twitterati and he's measuring up the curtains for Downing street.
Yours is of course not a big political PB brain, it is a ginormous political PB brain.
I get the feeling that a lot of PB Leavers are desperately hoping Jezza will stick to his ideological roots, thus eschewing any hint of compromise or political ambition; he is no doubt a duffer, but not that much of a duffer.
Unlike the Ultras I haven't forgotten our wealthy, educated and privileged minority. The result was 52:48. That means the softest, creamiest BINO. Our position can evolve from there, in either direction.
We had 25 years of the boiled frog approach. People can decry the cost, uncertainty and sheer wastefulness of doing the EU hokey cokey, but it seems to me that we have to decide, with our eyes wide open, whether we want the European project or not.
We don't. Sadly for logic and common sense, people overlooked the clause in Dave's deal which explicitly dealt with this very issue.
But that is old news, I hope (because I don't believe in the Grand European project) that all this doesn't mean that we somehow have to rejoin without all the protections that Dave's deal would have ensured for us.
If Cameron could have offered a timescale on the next treaty, it would have helped his cause enormously.
And the Labour loyalists here think they have found the sweet spot?
Hur hur hur.
Yes, it's an utterly bum deal and needs to be exposed as such. Barry Gardiner is my MP, and while I never voted for him, he is one of the few politicians actually to reason with his audience. It is disappointing to see him signing up to this nonsense.
Corbyn is becoming boring now - hasn't said anything much different from TM.
Let us see what TM comes up with on friday
I disagree. I think it an interesting speech because it takes resolutely internationalist approach.that almost no-one on either side of the debate has followed.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
Yep. A few years of Corbyn, if he is restrained by single market membership and ideally the SNP/Lib Dems, is probably a price worth paying in my view if it means avoiding a Jacob Rees Mogg Brexit. If a GE is forced and Labour promise single market membership I'll be voting Labour in a GE for the first time ever.
They won't.
Here is the "levels" of Brexit...
Remain in the EU <- SNP 2nd Referendum <- Lib Dems Exit EU, remain the THE SM & THE CU <- Chukka Umuna, Ken Clarke Exit EU, exit SM, stay in THE CU <- Noone so far as I can tell. Exit EU, exit SM, negotiate A CU <- Corbyn, Labour's current positon Exit EU, exit SM, exit CU <- Tories.
Listening to Corbyn talking about nationalising Royal Mail, water et al really is scary.
We all have one letterbox so we only need one mail delivery company. Competition is bad.
We all have one water pipe etc.
The man is as thick as mince...And if his talk of killing the city to help the "genuine" economy and promises attacks on the free press ddnt't scare you, what will do?
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
Disagree.
I don’t think a single member of Cabinet has bothered to spell out some basic facts, as Corbyn does here. And many businesses have supply chains and production processes, interwoven throughout Europe. Take the UK car industry, which supports 169,000 manufacturing jobs, 52,000 of which are here in the West Midlands.
If we look at the example of one of Britain’s most iconic brands in this sector, the Mini, we begin to see how reliant our automotive industry is on a frictionless, interwoven supply chain.
A mini will cross the Channel three times in a 2,000-mile journey before the finished car rolls off the production line. Starting in Oxford it will be shipped to France to be fitted for key components before being brought back to BMW’s Hams Hall plant in Warwickshire where it is drilled and milled into shape.
Once this process is complete the mini will be sent to Munich to be fitted with its engine, before ending its journey back at the mini plant in Oxford for final assembly.
If that car is to be sold on the continent then many of its components will have crossed the Channel four times.
Of course they have, many times.
Care to share a link on that?
That a lifelong Marxist is more willing to speak up for the concerns of business on this than a Conservative government is extraordinary.
Clear blue water is whether the same agreement amounts to a customs union or not? Hmm.
I think the difference is that Labour recognises that FTAs with other countries will have to be negotiated jointly with the EU, whereas the Tory position is that we will retain the freedom to negotiate our own FTAs while remaining in a tariff free and frictionless "custom arrangement" with the EU. They are different.
I prefer the Labour position because I think it is in our best interests to retain existing EU FTAs and use the EU strength when negotiating new FTAs. It is also more likely to succeed with the EU than the Tory cake and eat it proposal.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
If the EU would care to compromise on free movement then that might be possible. It seems they don't.
The irony is for all the fuss about FOM no-one shows the slightest interest in limiting immigration and more than one minister has called for more in the past few weeks. Ask Theresa May what the 2010-2016 Home Secretary did to reduce non-EU immigration, for instance.
TBF there's the "luxury foreign spouses" policy, where unless the British spouse makes more than 25k, regardless of how much the non-British partner would make, both partners and any other family are invited to piss off to bongo-bongo land or wherever.
The fact that she didn't have much impact on the numbers isn't for want of trying, Gordon Brown's government already understood that the voters didn't like foreigners and they'd already picked the low-hanging fruit.
Well, it's utter tosh of course, but given the parliamentary arithmetic it might indeed cause trouble for the government. The only bright side I can see is that, if the government did fall, we'd be treated to the hugely entertaining spectacle of a Jeremy Corbyn government trying to negotiate this tosh. Not sure that would compensate for everything else, mind.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
Yep. A few years of Corbyn, if he is restrained by single market membership and ideally the SNP/Lib Dems, is probably a price worth paying in my view if it means avoiding a Jacob Rees Mogg Brexit. If a GE is forced and Labour promise single market membership I'll be voting Labour in a GE for the first time ever.
They won't.
Here is the "levels" of Brexit...
Remain in the EU <- SNP 2nd Referendum <- Lib Dems Exit EU, remain the THE SM & THE CU <- Chukka Umuna, Ken Clarke Exit EU, exit SM, stay in THE CU <- Noone so far as I can tell. Exit EU, exit SM, negotiate A CU <- Corbyn, Labour's current positon Exit EU, exit SM, exit CU <- Tories.</p>
That's a great post, thanks. It'll be interesting to see how it changes over the next few weeks and months.
Sky news editor , Clear blue water.Labour A customs Union.May spokesperson no customs union.
Let us hear from TM before speculating on the conservative position
Big g do you think May might move from no customs union to A customs union ?
There would be little point. A customs union will probably not be sufficient to facilitate an open border with the EU - and of course in Ireland. Being outside of the SM would open the possibility of NTBs and would call for border checks.
What few are facing up to is the reality that the choice is between fully IN and completely OUT.
And the Labour loyalists here think they have found the sweet spot?
Hur hur hur.
Yes, it's an utterly bum deal and needs to be exposed as such. Barry Gardiner is my MP, and while I never voted for him, he is one of the few politicians actually to reason with his audience. It is disappointing to see him signing up to this nonsense.
Corbyn is becoming boring now - hasn't said anything much different from TM.
Let us see what TM comes up with on friday
I disagree. I think it an interesting speech because it takes resolutely internationalist approach.that almost no-one on either side of the debate has followed.
Or your average voter
I agree most voters don't know or care what happens I the outside world but ignorance isn't always bliss. Still, Corbyn's speech is different. Apart from the inevitable swipes at Tory Financiers, it's a speech that William Hague for instance could agree on in substance, and he is no Europhile.
Well, it's utter tosh of course, but given the parliamentary arithmetic it might indeed cause trouble for the government. The only bright side I can see is that, if the government did fall, we'd be treated to the hugely entertaining spectacle of a Jeremy Corbyn government trying to negotiate this tosh. Not sure that would compensate for everything else, mind.
We need another election so that Jeremy Corbyn can be either elected prime minster or rejected completely. The halfway house we have at the moment isn't a good situation.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
If the EU would care to compromise on free movement then that might be possible. It seems they don't.
The irony is for all the fuss about FOM no-one shows the slightest interest in limiting immigration and more than one minister has called for more in the past few weeks. Ask Theresa May what the 2010-2016 Home Secretary did to reduce non-EU immigration, for instance.
TBF there's the "luxury foreign spouses" policy, where unless the British spouse makes more than 25k, regardless of how much the non-British partner would make, both partners and any other family are invited to piss off to bongo-bongo land or wherever.
The fact that she didn't have much impact on the numbers isn't for want of trying, Gordon Brown's government already understood that the voters didn't like foreigners and they'd already picked the low-hanging fruit.
Net Non-EU immigration of +205 000 last year out of a total of +247 000, would suggest FOM is not the real issue any longer.
A NEW EU-UK customs union lol. So thats withdrawal of THE customs union then.
He wants the ability to jointly (with the EU) agree new FTAs which staying in THE customs union would not allow. We would of course inherit existing FTAs.
Sky news editor , Clear blue water.Labour A customs Union.May spokesperson no customs union.
Let us hear from TM before speculating on the conservative position
Big g do you think May might move from no customs union to A customs union ?
I think it will be a nuanced response and am interested to listen to her position
The challenge is that the EU doesn't really do nuanced. It has a set of trade mechanisms which it is very fond of. I do expect some fudge for elements of the City, but that's about it.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
Yep. A few years of Corbyn, if he is restrained by single market membership and ideally the SNP/Lib Dems, is probably a price worth paying in my view if it means avoiding a Jacob Rees Mogg Brexit. If a GE is forced and Labour promise single market membership I'll be voting Labour in a GE for the first time ever.
They won't.
Here is the "levels" of Brexit...
Remain in the EU <- SNP 2nd Referendum <- Lib Dems Exit EU, remain the THE SM & THE CU <- Chukka Umuna, Ken Clarke Exit EU, exit SM, stay in THE CU <- Noone so far as I can tell. Exit EU, exit SM, negotiate A CU <- Corbyn, Labour's current positon Exit EU, exit SM, exit CU <- Tories.</p>
I think Labour will end up for the SM. Most MPs and members want it and Corbyn was vague about it in his speech.
There isn't any difference between Stay and Negotiate in your list, I believe
I would vote for Anybody who promises to outlaw the expression "learning the lessons".....
Add "optics","Paris is worth a mass","kicking the can","long grass","Overton Window" and "it's a view" to the list and I am ready to go to the barricades for the Anti-Cliche Party.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
Yep. A few years of Corbyn, if he is restrained by single market membership and ideally the SNP/Lib Dems, is probably a price worth paying in my view if it means avoiding a Jacob Rees Mogg Brexit. If a GE is forced and Labour promise single market membership I'll be voting Labour in a GE for the first time ever.
They won't.
Here is the "levels" of Brexit...
Remain in the EU <- SNP 2nd Referendum <- Lib Dems Exit EU, remain the THE SM & THE CU <- Chukka Umuna, Ken Clarke Exit EU, exit SM, stay in THE CU <- Noone so far as I can tell. Exit EU, exit SM, negotiate A CU <- Corbyn, Labour's current positon Exit EU, exit SM, exit CU <- Tories.</p>
That's a great post, thanks. It'll be interesting to see how it changes over the next few weeks and months.
Need to add DUP to the list though. As they are propping this clown-fest up.
If you strip out the routine attacks on the Tories, so far the bits of Corbyn's speech which are actually about Brexit could have been written by Theresa May.
Disagree.
I don’t think a single member of Cabinet has bothered to spell out some basic facts, as Corbyn does here. And many businesses have supply chains and production processes, interwoven throughout Europe. Take the UK car industry, which supports 169,000 manufacturing jobs, 52,000 of which are here in the West Midlands.
If we look at the example of one of Britain’s most iconic brands in this sector, the Mini, we begin to see how reliant our automotive industry is on a frictionless, interwoven supply chain.
A mini will cross the Channel three times in a 2,000-mile journey before the finished car rolls off the production line. Starting in Oxford it will be shipped to France to be fitted for key components before being brought back to BMW’s Hams Hall plant in Warwickshire where it is drilled and milled into shape.
Once this process is complete the mini will be sent to Munich to be fitted with its engine, before ending its journey back at the mini plant in Oxford for final assembly.
If that car is to be sold on the continent then many of its components will have crossed the Channel four times.
Of course they have, many times.
Care to share a link on that?
That a lifelong Marxist is more willing to speak up for the concerns of business on this than a Conservative government is extraordinary.
Anything by Phil Hammond, for example, before or after the referendum.
I would vote for Anybody who promises to outlaw the expression "learning the lessons".....
Add "optics","Paris is worth a mass","kicking the can","long grass","Overton Window" and "it's a view" to the list and I am ready to go to the barricades for the Anti-Cliche Party.
The worst abuses of the English language (by which I mean the ones I personally find annoying) are 'pre-prepared' and 'could care less'. The former is ridiculous (it already has the damned prefix, and what other kind of prepared is there?) and the latter sounds like a mentally deficient oaf trying to be sarcastic and making himself sound like a buffoon.
I also have a pet hate (both for when I and others do it) of 'fire' being used for shooting arrows.
Listening to Corbyn talking about nationalising Royal Mail, water et al really is scary.
We all have one letterbox so we only need one mail delivery company. Competition is bad.
We all have one water pipe etc.
I think you have to distinguish between provision of infrastructure and retail services through that infrastructure.
It makes sense (I think) for public ownership of the water infrastructure (reservoirs, rivers, sewage, pipes) where there is no competition and a need for a national strategy. Ditto electricity, railways and roads. There can still be competition between retail providers of services that use that basic infrastructure. I think Labour makes that distinction.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
If the EU would care to compromise on free movement then that might be possible. It seems they don't.
The irony is for all the fuss about FOM no-one shows the slightest interest in limiting immigration and more than one minister has called for more in the past few weeks. Ask Theresa May what the 2010-2016 Home Secretary did to reduce non-EU immigration, for instance.
TBF there's the "luxury foreign spouses" policy, where unless the British spouse makes more than 25k, regardless of how much the non-British partner would make, both partners and any other family are invited to piss off to bongo-bongo land or wherever.
The fact that she didn't have much impact on the numbers isn't for want of trying, Gordon Brown's government already understood that the voters didn't like foreigners and they'd already picked the low-hanging fruit.
It's much worse than that. The British spouse needs to prove he (or she) was earning that *in the UK* for two years. So a British national who (to quote a purely hypothetical example) has lived abroad for a decade, met and married someone while overseas, and now wishes to return with his wife back to the UK, finds this to be almost impossible - even though he would be a higher-rate taxpayer and his wife could fill a skills gap as a language tutor.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
If the EU would care to compromise on free movement then that might be possible. It seems they don't.
The irony is for all the fuss about FOM no-one shows the slightest interest in limiting immigration and more than one minister has called for more in the past few weeks. Ask Theresa May what the 2010-2016 Home Secretary did to reduce non-EU immigration, for instance.
TBF there's the "luxury foreign spouses" policy, where unless the British spouse makes more than 25k, regardless of how much the non-British partner would make, both partners and any other family are invited to piss off to bongo-bongo land or wherever.
The fact that she didn't have much impact on the numbers isn't for want of trying, Gordon Brown's government already understood that the voters didn't like foreigners and they'd already picked the low-hanging fruit.
This is exactly so. Reducing non-EU migration substantially would require an extremely draconian crackdown on spousal and family migration, above & beyond the already quite stringent income criteria....to all intents & purposes banning family related immigration from the Indian subcontinent. A weak pound and "less welcoming atmosphere" has materially impacted immigration from the EU since EUref but that's hardly likely to affect immigration from the 3rd world.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
If the EU would care to compromise on free movement then that might be possible. It seems they don't.
The irony is for all the fuss about FOM no-one shows the slightest interest in limiting immigration and more than one minister has called for more in the past few weeks. Ask Theresa May what the 2010-2016 Home Secretary did to reduce non-EU immigration, for instance.
TBF there's the "luxury foreign spouses" policy, where unless the British spouse makes more than 25k, regardless of how much the non-British partner would make, both partners and any other family are invited to piss off to bongo-bongo land or wherever.
The fact that she didn't have much impact on the numbers isn't for want of trying, Gordon Brown's government already understood that the voters didn't like foreigners and they'd already picked the low-hanging fruit.
This conflation of concern about immigration levels with not liking foreigners is really, really tiresome. If you think the country is overcrowded, immigration control is the only way of tackling the issue, because it's illegal and a touch tyrannical to expel, or kill, people already here. It is a contingent fact that immigrants are also foreigners, and you simply can't tell whether an anti-immigrant is anti-foreigner without getting up close and personal and actually talking to them.
I am fascinated by the fact that those most vociferous in denouncing on this board this remarkably tolerant country as a hotbed of xenophobia tend, to a much greater extent than one would expect from mere chance, to choose to spend either their leisure time or all their time in some of the most expressly racist countries in the world. Not sure what to make of that. How's Tokyo?
A NEW EU-UK customs union lol. So thats withdrawal of THE customs union then.
He wants the ability to jointly (with the EU) agree new FTAs which staying in THE customs union would not allow. We would of course inherit existing FTAs.
Why would the EU want to agree new FTAs on our behalf? And if it is willing to do so, in what way is that different to Mrs May's proposals?
As for inheriting existing FTAs, there's no 'of course' about it. Why should there be?
I would vote for Anybody who promises to outlaw the expression "learning the lessons".....
Add "optics","Paris is worth a mass","kicking the can","long grass","Overton Window" and "it's a view" to the list and I am ready to go to the barricades for the Anti-Cliche Party.
I'm going to draw a line under that post, and move on.
Comments
No government has made gains in a non-GE year since the 1980s; the normal course of events is that opposition parties use local elections to extract free hits on unpopular aspects of the government. Even William Hague and IDS made good gains (and not only because Hague was coming off the disastrous Tory results of the mid-1990s; they were respectable in terms of vote share too).
The risk for May is that the media narrative is set before the polls and is undisturbed by (and despite) them. This happened to IDS, who all the political correspondents and commentators decided was useless and needed to go, and who stuck to that narrative even though he made good gains in 2002 and 2003 (and to be fair, it was right).
So with May - particularly as her own media team is, like her, far too defensive and incapable of setting the agenda and expectations.
If current polling is reliable - and local by-elections suggest it is - then Labour probably leads by a head. That won't be directly fed into England-wide results, which are London-heavy in this round and which, as such, favour Labour. All the same, the UKIP seats up for grabs and the implicit current slight Lab-to-Con in England-outside-London since 2014 should mean relatively small net Con losses overall.
If so, that'll bolster her position for a few days. But then comes the Customs Union vote, which is of far more importance to her future.
"Because Labour's research reckons that Labour Leavers are soft Leavers whose party loyalty trumps European issues, and the DNVers who turned out for EUref won't bother in a GE.
He's looking to bring down May's administration. In fairness, it would be a mercy killing.
Politically it's quite clever, and I think it's worth the gamble. Muggles won't be paying attention anyway. "
All he really needs is a 15 second clip of him saying 'SOFT BREXIT SOFT BREXIT TORIES BAD NHS' for the Twitterati and he's measuring up the curtains for Downing street.
Hur hur hur.
The Referendum was designed to resolve the divisions in the Conservative Party. The result didn't go to plan, so that remains work in progress! The collateral damage created 'Leavers' and 'Remainers'. You hadn't heard much about those factions before the EU campaign!
He’s currently whingeing about the terrible Tories in his usual nasal way, but when he says it’s been 20 months and the government is still all over the shop, he’s not wrong, is he?
I get the feeling that a lot of PB Leavers are desperately hoping Jezza will stick to his ideological roots, thus eschewing any hint of compromise or political ambition; he is no doubt a duffer, but not that much of a duffer.
I don’t think a single member of Cabinet has bothered to spell out some basic facts, as Corbyn does here.
And many businesses have supply chains and production processes, interwoven throughout Europe. Take the UK car industry, which supports 169,000 manufacturing jobs, 52,000 of which are here in the West Midlands.
If we look at the example of one of Britain’s most iconic brands in this sector, the Mini, we begin to see how reliant our automotive industry is on a frictionless, interwoven supply chain.
A mini will cross the Channel three times in a 2,000-mile journey before the finished car rolls off the production line. Starting in Oxford it will be shipped to France to be fitted for key components before being brought back to BMW’s Hams Hall plant in Warwickshire where it is drilled and milled into shape.
Once this process is complete the mini will be sent to Munich to be fitted with its engine, before ending its journey back at the mini plant in Oxford for final assembly.
If that car is to be sold on the continent then many of its components will have crossed the Channel four times.
The result was 52:48. That means the softest, creamiest BINO. Our position can evolve from there, in either direction.
We had 25 years of the boiled frog approach. People can decry the cost, uncertainty and sheer wastefulness of doing the EU hokey cokey, but it seems to me that we have to decide, with our eyes wide open, whether we want the European project or not.
It’s a strong buttress against Corbyn’s economic lunacy.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5432175/amp/Boris-Johnson-considered-RESIGNING-Chequers-meeting.html
But I suspect that in due course they will offer a vote on “The Deal”. They can then continue to sound Brexity while also winning the support of Remainers desperate to relitigate the vote.
It’s very clever.
But that is old news, I hope (because I don't believe in the Grand European project) that all this doesn't mean that we somehow have to rejoin without all the protections that Dave's deal would have ensured for us.
I shall be vindicated.
Jeremy Corbyn wont be prime minister.
Still Corbyn manages to be more coherent than May by some distance. Also most of his specific objections to the Single Market can be finessed.
Let us see what TM comes up with on friday
Fatty Snowflake generation....
They are underestimating their enemy which, if they continue to do so, would qualify for a (the) Oscar Wilde quote.
I'd vote for whoever wants to ban world book day; or at least the bit that means that parents have to make 'outfits' for their children according to whatever the half-arsed theme is this year.
And I'm not just saying this because my arts and crafts skills are non-existent. No siree
Once you buy one they demand every pair of footwear have lights in them.
https://flashwear.co.uk/
We all have one letterbox so we only need one mail delivery company. Competition is bad.
We all have one water pipe etc.
Here is the "levels" of Brexit...
Remain in the EU <- SNP
2nd Referendum <- Lib Dems
Exit EU, remain the THE SM & THE CU <- Chukka Umuna, Ken Clarke
Exit EU, exit SM, stay in THE CU <- Noone so far as I can tell.
Exit EU, exit SM, negotiate A CU <- Corbyn, Labour's current positon
Exit EU, exit SM, exit CU <- Tories.
That a lifelong Marxist is more willing to speak up for the concerns of business on this than a Conservative government is extraordinary.
I prefer the Labour position because I think it is in our best interests to retain existing EU FTAs and use the EU strength when negotiating new FTAs. It is also more likely to succeed with the EU than the Tory cake and eat it proposal.
The fact that she didn't have much impact on the numbers isn't for want of trying, Gordon Brown's government already understood that the voters didn't like foreigners and they'd already picked the low-hanging fruit.
What few are facing up to is the reality that the choice is between fully IN and completely OUT.
There isn't any difference between Stay and Negotiate in your list, I believe
I agree on your second point.
Indeed.
I also have a pet hate (both for when I and others do it) of 'fire' being used for shooting arrows.
It makes sense (I think) for public ownership of the water infrastructure (reservoirs, rivers, sewage, pipes) where there is no competition and a need for a national strategy. Ditto electricity, railways and roads. There can still be competition between retail providers of services that use that basic infrastructure. I think Labour makes that distinction.
I am fascinated by the fact that those most vociferous in denouncing on this board this remarkably tolerant country as a hotbed of xenophobia tend, to a much greater extent than one would expect from mere chance, to choose to spend either their leisure time or all their time in some of the most expressly racist countries in the world. Not sure what to make of that. How's Tokyo?
As for inheriting existing FTAs, there's no 'of course' about it. Why should there be?
After all we only have one lunchtime, one bank account, one body to wear things on and so on. Just give him time
I think Jeremy has done very well today. It's probably the best speech Starmer's ever given.
Mr. HYUFD, indeed. Corbyn as PM would be far worse than having a sensible PM and the UK leaving the EU.
re the Selmayr coup, Fraser Nelson's fascinating article in Friday's Telegraph is behind the paywall but you can read it here.