Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. The Brexit vote has brought it back.
Anyone who doesn't like this and who still wants Brexit will need to recognise it or embrace Bremain. You can't have your cake and eat it. Something's got to break.
Since the Tories have such a tiny presence in NI they could conceivably drop the Unionism where that territory is concerned. But if they stop being Unionists they may break up, because ideology and tradition are important and not everything is realpolitik.
The minority government is likely to fall by March 2019 at the outside not because of Anna Soubry etc. but because of its reliance on the DUP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
It was agreed in December the UK would leave the CU and SM but have enough regulatory alignment to resolve the Irish border issue
Poundworld + House of Fraser = 11,300 jobs, less Amazon adding 2,500 jobs. The growing internet doesn't balance out the retail jobs lost. Are we heading into a recession perhaps ? To balance out - plenty of cranes and building about in Coventry and Sheffield which is normally a good leading indicator of growth.
Executive summary - I'm not sure.
Retail has been struggling for a long time as spending shifts to the internet. It has not stopped employment reaching record levels. I personally have found this odd since retail has traditionally employed even the uneducated illiterates that our schools and colleges produce in such abundance. I have struggled to see what they are doing instead.
I think that the broad range of indicators are that we are heading into a period of moderate growth. I would guess that Q2 will come in at 0.3%, maybe 0.4%. The posiiton on the continent can be overstated too. The Markit PMI for Europe issued this morning sees broad growth over most sectors: https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/94ce487133f841c88ebbd50be5539cc5
I don't think the EZ will meet the heady heights some were suggesting in January or February this year but they are a very long way from a recession. Which is good news for us of course.
The worrying part is the direction of travel in the EMU countries. There has been a rapid deterioration of economic conditions with no single cause.
I think that you are overstating it slightly but there is no doubt that the buzz from the start of the year has faded.
German factory orders are down 2.5% in April and down by 0.1% YoY, slowing down from 2.9% growth YoY last month. That is a rapid deterioration.
"Domestic orders decreased by 4.8% and foreign orders decreased by 0.8% in April 2018 on the previous month. New orders from the euro area were down 9.9%, new orders from other countries increased 5.4% compared to March 2018. "
Domestic and Euro area orders are driving the downturn as well.
This is also a trend being seen across a lot of EMU countries, not just Germany.
But if retail demand is up as the PMIs are indicating, especially in Germany, that will feed through to new orders in the months to come. As I say, it is a much more mixed picture than it was at the start of the year but the ECB policy is still expansive unlike the Fed and, to a much lesser extent, the BoE.
Oh FFS. Tell them to start chasing crooks on mopeds instead. That was the official advice at the time. It may have proven to be ill advised but what the hell does it have to do with the police?
The advice was correct based upon what was known at the time.
And that will help how? There is already an enquiry, the police no damn all about fires, and the implied threat of prosecution will impede the development of better techniques.
Agreed. They need to treat this like it was a plane or train crash, look in detail at what happened and why, making recommendations to prevent such accidents in the future.
Sadly there’s a small but very loud group of people who just want to see someone in prison, that attitude turns everyone involved from being constructive to being defensive.
But if retail demand is up as the PMIs are indicating, especially in Germany, that will feed through to new orders in the months to come. As I say, it is a much more mixed picture than it was at the start of the year but the ECB policy is still expansive unlike the Fed and, to a much lesser extent, the BoE.
Possibly, but I'm not convinced that domestic demand in Germany will cover the gaps from external demand. Also, the ECB are closing down their QE scheme. I think we will see a severe slowdown in Q2 for the Eurozone nations and the possibility of contraction towards the end of the year when the ECB QE programme ends.
A victory for fudge, by the sound of it - which will suit the EU very well, their favourite food. "Tariff agreement for a limited time until an alternative is agreed at the earliest possible date" is a perfectly viable deal, even if it's War Loanish in reality.
This does mean that an upfront deal on Ireland is probably dead - if the backstop is tariff agreement, there's no reason why the EU would want to look further.
And that will help how? There is already an enquiry, the police no damn all about fires, and the implied threat of prosecution will impede the development of better techniques.
Agreed. They need to treat this like it was a plane or train crash, look in detail at what happened and why, making recommendations to prevent such accidents in the future.
Sadly there’s a small but very loud group of people who just want to see someone in prison, that attitude turns everyone involved from being constructive to being defensive.
This reminds me of the Hillsborough disaster, where a finding of 96 unlawful deaths have led to charges of gross negligence manslaughter. I hope that doesn't happen in this case, but we don't know all the facts.
This is a hard thing to say, but 'justice' is only of secondary importance. The vital thing has to be to learn the lessons of what occurred and prevent it happening again. Fortunately that occurred after Hillsborough, thanks to the Taylor Report. It will be interesting to see if the latest inquiry produces 'good' results.
Poundworld + House of Fraser = 11,300 jobs, less Amazon adding 2,500 jobs. The growing internet doesn't balance out the retail jobs lost. Are we heading into a recession perhaps ? To balance out - plenty of cranes and building about in Coventry and Sheffield which is normally a good leading indicator of growth.
Executive summary - I'm not sure.
Retail has been struggling for a long time as spending shifts to the internet. It has not stopped employment reaching record levels. I personally have found this odd since retail has traditionally employed even the uneducated illiterates that our schools and colleges produce in such abundance. I have struggled to see what they are doing instead.
I think that the broad range of indicators are that we are heading into a period of moderate growth. I would guess that Q2 will come in at 0.3%, maybe 0.4%. The posiiton on the continent can be overstated too. The Markit PMI for Europe issued this morning sees broad growth over most sectors: https://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/94ce487133f841c88ebbd50be5539cc5
I don't think the EZ will meet the heady heights some were suggesting in January or February this year but they are a very long way from a recession. Which is good news for us of course.
The worrying part is the direction of travel in the EMU countries. There has been a rapid deterioration of economic conditions with no single cause.
What evidence do you have for a rapid deterioration of economic conditions in the EMU countries? The figures cited by DavidL would appear to indicate otherwise.
A victory for fudge, by the sound of it - which will suit the EU very well, their favourite food. "Tariff agreement for a limited time until an alternative is agreed at the earliest possible date" is a perfectly viable deal, even if it's War Loanish in reality.
This does mean that an upfront deal on Ireland is probably dead - if the backstop is tariff agreement, there's no reason why the EU would want to look further.
While that is true, it does have significant future consequences, as future governments are not then bound by treaty not to seek a better deal. And we have seen how the EU insists on the letter of the law to its own advantage.
A victory for fudge, by the sound of it - which will suit the EU very well, their favourite food. "Tariff agreement for a limited time until an alternative is agreed at the earliest possible date" is a perfectly viable deal, even if it's War Loanish in reality.
This does mean that an upfront deal on Ireland is probably dead - if the backstop is tariff agreement, there's no reason why the EU would want to look further.
The earliest possible date of agreement could be in the next century by the sound of it.
So we will end up with a type of SM and a Customs Union with annual payments.
So the difference will be reduced FoM and no say and , of course, ECJ will stay.
A victory for fudge, by the sound of it - which will suit the EU very well, their favourite food. "Tariff agreement for a limited time until an alternative is agreed at the earliest possible date" is a perfectly viable deal, even if it's War Loanish in reality.
This does mean that an upfront deal on Ireland is probably dead - if the backstop is tariff agreement, there's no reason why the EU would want to look further.
The earliest possible date of agreement could be in the next century by the sound of it.
What do police numbers have to do with the Met’s decision not to chase scrotes on bikes?
They do not have enough police to chase scrotes on bikes?
They have enough police, but after a scrote got killed in a chase two years ago the Met stopped chasing them.
With the entirely predictable consequence that law and order is now being broken down by scrotes on bikes.
They lost over 600 cops in 6 months last year, I'd imagine that'd be a much bigger number over 2 years. I'd guess that might have *some* affect on their scrote chasing capability.
I'm also now told the paper will make it clear HMG "expects" the backstop to end by 2021. But crucially there is NO hard commitment to this, just an aspiration. Will that be enough for the ERG?"
That shouldn't be a problem for Barnier. HMG can expect what it likes. Looks as if May has won.
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. The Brexit vote has brought it back.
Anyone who doesn't like this and who still wants Brexit will need to recognise it or embrace Bremain. You can't have your cake and eat it. Something's got to break.
Since the Tories have such a tiny presence in NI they could conceivably drop the Unionism where that territory is concerned. But if they stop being Unionists they may break up, because ideology and tradition are important and not everything is realpolitik.
The minority government is likely to fall by March 2019 at the outside not because of Anna Soubry etc. but because of its reliance on the DUP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a Lab govt.
Any Cons (talking to you @HYUFD) who kid themselves that not enough people would vote for Corbyn (of course many won't) are living in pre GE-2017 la-la land.
Someone asked earlier why, if everything was so good in 1997, the Cons lost. The answer was people were tired of the Cons by that stage. Add in sleaze and the country were ready for a change. And so shall it be in 2022.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
What do police numbers have to do with the Met’s decision not to chase scrotes on bikes?
They do not have enough police to chase scrotes on bikes?
They have enough police, but after a scrote got killed in a chase two years ago the Met stopped chasing them.
With the entirely predictable consequence that law and order is now being broken down by scrotes on bikes.
They lost over 600 cops in 6 months last year, I'd imagine that'd be a much bigger number over 2 years. I'd guess that might have *some* affect on their scrote chasing capability.
I'm also now told the paper will make it clear HMG "expects" the backstop to end by 2021. But crucially there is NO hard commitment to this, just an aspiration. Will that be enough for the ERG?"
That shouldn't be a problem for Barnier. HMG can expect what it likes. Looks as if May has won.
No
there will be a fudged agreement, the actors will all move on, new actors will appear and then the UK will continue to drift off
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. The Brexit vote has brought it back.
Anyone who doesn't like this and who still wants Brexit will need to recognise it or embrace Bremain. You can't have your cake and eat it. Something's got to break.
Since the Tories have such a tiny presence in NI they could conceivably drop the Unionism where that territory is concerned. But if they stop being Unionists they may break up, because ideology and tradition are important and not everything is realpolitik.
The minority government is likely to fall by March 2019 at the outside not because of Anna Soubry etc. but because of its reliance on the DUP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. The Brexit vote has brought it back.
Anyone who doesn't like this and who still wants Brexit will need to recognise it or embrace Bremain. You can't have your cake and eat it. Something's got to break.
Since the Tories have such a tiny presence in NI they could conceivably drop the Unionism where that territory is concerned. But if they stop being Unionists they may break up, because ideology and tradition are important and not everything is realpolitik.
The minority government is likely to fall by March 2019 at the outside not because of Anna Soubry etc. but because of its reliance on the DUP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
The note has been published. Here is the key wording:
Time limiting the agreement 26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.
It looks as if DD has some idea of how "a" (not "the") time limit could be delivered which he will discuss with Barnier. Good luck with that.
A victory for fudge, by the sound of it - which will suit the EU very well, their favourite food. "Tariff agreement for a limited time until an alternative is agreed at the earliest possible date" is a perfectly viable deal, even if it's War Loanish in reality.
This does mean that an upfront deal on Ireland is probably dead - if the backstop is tariff agreement, there's no reason why the EU would want to look further.
The earliest possible date of agreement could be in the next century by the sound of it.
?
December 2021 is not the next century.
"The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU."
Fudge central. Remind me, what was the big row about ?
What do police numbers have to do with the Met’s decision not to chase scrotes on bikes?
They do not have enough police to chase scrotes on bikes?
They have enough police, but after a scrote got killed in a chase two years ago the Met stopped chasing them.
With the entirely predictable consequence that law and order is now being broken down by scrotes on bikes.
They lost over 600 cops in 6 months last year, I'd imagine that'd be a much bigger number over 2 years. I'd guess that might have *some* affect on their scrote chasing capability.
Capability is different from policy.
Indeed.
An example:
Based on the Brexit result, the Tory party had a policy to enact the will of the British (sic) people. Now two years later, based on reduced parliamentary representation, talentlessness and incompetence, they have a reduced capability to carry this out.
And that will help how? There is already an enquiry, the police no damn all about fires, and the implied threat of prosecution will impede the development of better techniques.
Agreed. They need to treat this like it was a plane or train crash, look in detail at what happened and why, making recommendations to prevent such accidents in the future.
Sadly there’s a small but very loud group of people who just want to see someone in prison, that attitude turns everyone involved from being constructive to being defensive.
This reminds me of the Hillsborough disaster, where a finding of 96 unlawful deaths have led to charges of gross negligence manslaughter. I hope that doesn't happen in this case, but we don't know all the facts.
This is a hard thing to say, but 'justice' is only of secondary importance. The vital thing has to be to learn the lessons of what occurred and prevent it happening again. Fortunately that occurred after Hillsborough, thanks to the Taylor Report. It will be interesting to see if the latest inquiry produces 'good' results.
Indeed, I was also thinking of Hillsborough as an analogy, although that was much more of a human - centred event.
At Grenfell, there’s going to be a long chain of events, procurement processes, building standards, facade design, suitability and legality of materials, the interaction and installation etc.
Unless there’s a smoking human gun somewhere (think of the Challenger disaster, where serious objections were presented and overruled) prosecuting people isn’t going to be the answer, the legacy of the sad events at Grenfell should be improved building standards and reactions to fires, much as the legacy of Hillsborough was safer football stadia with fixed seating.
As an immediate safety action, I would suggest that externally cladded buildings be evacuated in short order following discovery of a fire.
As an aside, there was a big hotel fire over here a couple of years ago, The Address Hotel. Fortunately given the scale of the fire, there was but a single casualty, a firefighter. The major issue with the spread of the fire was chased down to the cladding material being substandard, when compared to the sample that had been tested by authorities before the building was constructed. It turned out that the sample came from the cladding company’s US factory, whereas the production of the hotel’s panels were subcontracted to a local factory - those panels weren’t tested and were clearly more flammable than they should have been.
I'm also now told the paper will make it clear HMG "expects" the backstop to end by 2021. But crucially there is NO hard commitment to this, just an aspiration. Will that be enough for the ERG?"
That shouldn't be a problem for Barnier. HMG can expect what it likes. Looks as if May has won.
Yes, as I said earlier - it's a classic EU fudge and a War Loan solution. We assure everyone we expect that a deal will be done. We don't actually have to achieve a deal. I don't think the EU will object to that at all.
I'm not clear about the bit that says we can sign deals with others on areas not affected by the customs agreement - are there lots of such things?
What do police numbers have to do with the Met’s decision not to chase scrotes on bikes?
They do not have enough police to chase scrotes on bikes?
They have enough police, but after a scrote got killed in a chase two years ago the Met stopped chasing them.
With the entirely predictable consequence that law and order is now being broken down by scrotes on bikes.
They lost over 600 cops in 6 months last year, I'd imagine that'd be a much bigger number over 2 years. I'd guess that might have *some* affect on their scrote chasing capability.
Capability is different from policy.
Indeed.
An example:
Based on the Brexit result, the Tory party had a policy to enact the will of the British (sic) people. Now two years later, based on reduced parliamentary representation, talentlessness and incompetence, they have a reduced capability to carry this out.
Me? Are you kidding? Hey, I was with you all the time! That was beautiful! Did you see the way the Leavers fell into our trap?!
The note has been published. Here is the key wording:
Time limiting the agreement 26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.
It looks as if DD has some idea of how "a" (not "the") time limit could be delivered which he will discuss with Barnier. Good luck with that.
By the end of 2021, we will have mastered the difference between an "a" and "the". It is being used in so many different situations. "A" is beginning to stand for "almost".
The note has been published. Here is the key wording:
Time limiting the agreement 26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.
It looks as if DD has some idea of how "a" (not "the") time limit could be delivered which he will discuss with Barnier. Good luck with that.
'should' and 'expects'; not 'will'. The EU ... *should* agree to this.
I'm also now told the paper will make it clear HMG "expects" the backstop to end by 2021. But crucially there is NO hard commitment to this, just an aspiration. Will that be enough for the ERG?"
That shouldn't be a problem for Barnier. HMG can expect what it likes. Looks as if May has won.
Yes, as I said earlier - it's a classic EU fudge and a War Loan solution. We assure everyone we expect that a deal will be done. We don't actually have to achieve a deal. I don't think the EU will object to that at all.
I'm not clear about the bit that says we can sign deals with others on areas not affected by the customs agreement - are there lots of such things?
Services? I think it is probably a bit of symbolism to placate the Brexiteers but means little in practice. [Why am I becoming such a cynic?]
I'm also now told the paper will make it clear HMG "expects" the backstop to end by 2021. But crucially there is NO hard commitment to this, just an aspiration. Will that be enough for the ERG?"
That shouldn't be a problem for Barnier. HMG can expect what it likes. Looks as if May has won.
Yes, as I said earlier - it's a classic EU fudge and a War Loan solution. We assure everyone we expect that a deal will be done. We don't actually have to achieve a deal. I don't think the EU will object to that at all.
I'm not clear about the bit that says we can sign deals with others on areas not affected by the customs agreement- are there lots of such things?
Equally unclear. Is there any trade in commodities not covered by the Customs Union ?
What do police numbers have to do with the Met’s decision not to chase scrotes on bikes?
They do not have enough police to chase scrotes on bikes?
They have enough police, but after a scrote got killed in a chase two years ago the Met stopped chasing them.
With the entirely predictable consequence that law and order is now being broken down by scrotes on bikes.
They lost over 600 cops in 6 months last year, I'd imagine that'd be a much bigger number over 2 years. I'd guess that might have *some* affect on their scrote chasing capability.
The number of cops is completely irrelevant, the problem is that the cops are refusing to chase the robbers. More cops still not chasing the robbers won’t make a blind bit of difference.
The only thing that could conceivably make much difference with money, is if the Met were to buy a couple of dozen more helicopters. Better just to tell the scrotes that we will chase them down, and send the mayor out to comfort their families later...
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. UP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
The note has been published. Here is the key wording:
Time limiting the agreement 26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.
It looks as if DD has some idea of how "a" (not "the") time limit could be delivered which he will discuss with Barnier. Good luck with that.
One of my standard techniques for scrutinising documents from the other side is to look for "clearly", "obviously" etc and ring them. They almost always show the weak points.
Two "is clear"s in a short paragraph does not bode well.
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. UP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. UP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
Not really a follower of politics, are you?
Clearly you aren't no, even Ted Heath had big poll leads in the late 1960s and won huge local election swings and he is the only example since WW2 of an opposition leader without a big poll lead in the final polls winning a majority in a general election
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. UP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
There has also been a swing from the Gov't to the main opposition party at every election since 1983. It takes a really odd swing this time round for that not at least to result in a minority Labour Gov't.
Britain leaving the SM and CU means a hard Irish border or Irish unification. (NI independence and Roirexit would also work but won't happen.) It probably also requires that Britain legislates to start regarding the RoI as a fully foreign country like France and Germany. Sooner or later a politician is going to say so - probably from the Tory right. Sinn Fein may then raise their game and start taking advantage of the Brexit mess at another level.
Britain and the RoI's simultaneous entry to the EU in 1973 only shelved the Irish question. UP.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads ment
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
There has also been a swing from the Gov't to the main opposition party at every election since 1983. It takes a really odd swing this time round for that not at least to result in a minority Labour Gov't.
Which even on current polls Labour are failing to achieve, Labour have to win Tory voters next time and are failing completely.
Though Tories would not be too upset by largest party and Corbyn propped up by the LDs and SNP
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition period because of the need to end free movement the idea Corbyn will storm to a landslide at the next general election is absurd.
By 1994 Blair had around a 20 point lead over Major, Corbyn cannot even get a 1% lead in most polls now, even Kinnock, Foot and Ed Miliband were able to get clear midterm poll leads unlike Corbyn.
If voters think Brexit too soft they will vote UKIP not Labour, if voters think UKIP too hard they may well vote LD not Corbyn Labour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
Not really a follower of politics, are you?
Clearly you aren't no, even Ted Heath had big poll leads in the late 1960s and won huge local election swings and he is the only example since WW2 of an opposition leader without a big poll lead in the final polls winning a majority in a general election
Macmillan had a bigger lead in late 1960 yet the Tories went on to lose the 1964 election. Moreover Labour performed better in 1992 than polls were suggesting in 1988.Similarly the Tories did much better in 2005 than the polls were showing in mid 2002.
All this fudge is brilliant for preventing Scottish independence.
By denying a concrete position going forward there is nothing for Nationalists to campaign against.
I think you a little optomistic there, our Scots Nationalst Bretheren could pick a fight in an unoccupied room!
Say that to my face big man?
But seriously, I want to be shot of this fucking mess of a union ASAP but unfortunately it does not seem like the rest of the people of Scotland agree with me. And to have a chance it has to be done sooner rather than later otherwise all the EU citizens who were conned into supporting the union in 2014 will be frozen out of the franchise for the next attempt.
But by fudging and fudging and fudging it removes the necessary red lines from the SNP case for a 2nd indyref even if the eventual result will hit the redlines in years to come.
The note has been published. Here is the key wording:
Time limiting the agreement 26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.
It looks as if DD has some idea of how "a" (not "the") time limit could be delivered which he will discuss with Barnier. Good luck with that.
One of my standard techniques for scrutinising documents from the other side is to look for "clearly", "obviously" etc and ring them. They almost always show the weak points.
Two "is clear"s in a short paragraph does not bode well.
Ha, that’s very true. Words like that in any document are trying to tell you what to think, and if they’re from the other side then that like of thinking is more likely to be to their advantage than yours.
Which is why we will go for CU/SM. Any other option threatens the still fragile peace in RoI/NI.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition bour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
Not really a follower of politics, are you?
Clearly you aren't no, even Ted Heath had big poll leads in the late 1960s and won huge local election swings and he is the only example since WW2 of an opposition leader without a big poll lead in the final polls winning a majority in a general election
Macmillan had a bigger lead in late 1960 yet the Tories went on to lose the 1964 election. Moreover Labour performed better in 1992 than polls were suggesting in 1988.Similarly the Tories did much better in 2005 than the polls were showing in mid 2002.
Wilson was not Labour leader then, he only took over in 1963 and he scraped home with a majority of just 4. Gaitskill may have lost again in 1964 on his second attempt like Corbyn will be.
Labour also did much better in local elections then than Corbyn has been.
Labour lost in 1992 and Major won more votes than any PM in history.
Howard got almost exactly the same voteshare as IDS was polling in 2002, just post Iraq a few Labour voters went LD
All this fudge is brilliant for preventing Scottish independence.
By denying a concrete position going forward there is nothing for Nationalists to campaign against.
I think you a little optomistic there, our Scots Nationalst Bretheren could pick a fight in an unoccupied room!
Say that to my face big man?
But seriously, I want to be shot of this fucking mess of a union ASAP but unfortunately it does not seem like the rest of the people of Scotland agree with me. And to have a chance it has to be done sooner rather than later otherwise all the EU citizens who were conned into supporting the union in 2014 will be frozen out of the franchise for the next attempt.
But by fudging and fudging and fudging it removes the necessary red lines from the SNP case for a 2nd indyref even if the eventual result will hit the redlines in years to come.
'Do you really want to be governed by these twats' is an ok holding position. Besides we've been told on this very forum that betrayal of Brexit will lead to rioting and stringing up. Perhaps we can slip away while the gammony insurrection takes place in Brexitland.
Because this note implies a continuing customs union (and appropriate single market regulations) for an unlimited time (despite an "expectation" on the part of HMG that it will end in Dec 2021), I think it may be sufficient to buy off the Tory Remainers on the vote next Tuesday on CU and EEA/SM.
It was significant that TM had meetings on the draft text with the key Tory Remainers before she showed it to Boris et al. I don't think the "concession" she has made to DD materially alters the consequence of this proposal to the EU. I can't see why the EU won't accept this as a backstop proposal. It gives them what they want. They can recognise HMG's expectation, and know that it is hopelessly optimistic but hey ho so what.
That really is nonsense. This is supposed to be a negotiating position showing our aspirations for any agreement with the EU. The legally binding text will come later.
FWIW I think that the UK will find it much easier to suit itself once we are out of the EU. At the moment we are tied in in so many ways and the usual nothing is agreed until everything is agreed gives the EU substantial advantages. That will not always be the case.
That really is nonsense. This is supposed to be a negotiating position showing our aspirations for any agreement with the EU. The legally binding text will come later.
FWIW I think that the UK will find it much easier to suit itself once we are out of the EU. At the moment we are tied in in so many ways and the usual nothing is agreed until everything is agreed gives the EU substantial advantages. That will not always be the case.
in any event unbalanced deals rarely stick, theyre just the jump off point for the next round
Because this note implies a continuing customs union (and appropriate single market regulations) for an unlimited time (despite an "expectation" on the part of HMG that it will end in Dec 2021), I think it may be sufficient to buy off the Tory Remainers on the vote next Tuesday on CU and EEA/SM.
It was significant that TM had meetings on the draft text with the key Tory Remainers before she showed it to Boris et al. I don't think the "concession" she has made to DD materially alters the consequence of this proposal to the EU. I can't see why the EU won't accept this as a backstop proposal. It gives them what they want. They can recognise HMG's expectation, and know that it is hopelessly optimistic but hey ho so what.
Yes it looks good for the Betfair market on this 'out by 29th March' backers, which is the main point of this whole exercise.
The most amusing feature of the last 48 hours of shenanigans about Brexit is watching the pundits squirm that they haven't got a resignation so now they're urgung the EU to throw it out, while the never correct Robert Peston now believes DD won't be staying 'for long'. The only thing more shambolic that the two major political parties in the UK is the press reporting of them.
CDU/CSU 33% SPD 17% AfD 16% Left 11% Greens 11% FDP 9%
Merkel has now got 1 in 4 Germans voting for radical parties.
The SPD are increasingly looking terminal. Their leader is hopeless, they will get hit by staying coalition and they have no policies. How do they turn that round ?
The most amusing feature of the last 48 hours of shenanigans about Brexit is watching the pundits squirm that they haven't got a resignation so now they're urgung the EU to throw it out, while the never correct Robert Peston now believes DD won't be staying 'for long'. The only thing more shambolic that the two major political parties in the UK is the press reporting of them.
Yes actually this is a good point - the frustration as they said "no this might be fine, no one resigning" was palpable.
I mean I realise that the environment is febrile but the real time reporting often doesn't do anyone any favours.
The most amusing feature of the last 48 hours of shenanigans about Brexit is watching the pundits squirm that they haven't got a resignation so now they're urgung the EU to throw it out, while the never correct Robert Peston now believes DD won't be staying 'for long'. The only thing more shambolic that the two major political parties in the UK is the press reporting of them.
The most amusing feature of the last 48 hours of shenanigans about Brexit is watching the pundits squirm that they haven't got a resignation so now they're urgung the EU to throw it out, while the never correct Robert Peston now believes DD won't be staying 'for long'. The only thing more shambolic that the two major political parties in the UK is the press reporting of them.
Because this note implies a continuing customs union (and appropriate single market regulations) for an unlimited time (despite an "expectation" on the part of HMG that it will end in Dec 2021), I think it may be sufficient to buy off the Tory Remainers on the vote next Tuesday on CU and EEA/SM.
It was significant that TM had meetings on the draft text with the key Tory Remainers before she showed it to Boris et al. I don't think the "concession" she has made to DD materially alters the consequence of this proposal to the EU. I can't see why the EU won't accept this as a backstop proposal. It gives them what they want. They can recognise HMG's expectation, and know that it is hopelessly optimistic but hey ho so what.
In fact I think, on reflection, that it seals the Customs Union indefinitely.
1. We agree to stay in the Customs Union until we agree to split it. But: 2. The EU doesn't want to split it. So: 3. We stay.
The most amusing feature of the last 48 hours of shenanigans about Brexit is watching the pundits squirm that they haven't got a resignation so now they're urgung the EU to throw it out, while the never correct Robert Peston now believes DD won't be staying 'for long'. The only thing more shambolic that the two major political parties in the UK is the press reporting of them.
Very true, and somewhat sad to see. I was clearly very naïve to think that most of the press would back the government over Brexit. I still think it’s possible that we end up with no deal because the EU side only ever talk to Remainers and think the Lobby pack are reflective of British public opinion.
That really is nonsense. This is supposed to be a negotiating position showing our aspirations for any agreement with the EU. The legally binding text will come later.
FWIW I think that the UK will find it much easier to suit itself once we are out of the EU. At the moment we are tied in in so many ways and the usual nothing is agreed until everything is agreed gives the EU substantial advantages. That will not always be the case.
If it were just our aspirations it wouldn't have taken so long to agree within HMG. It is a counter-proposal to the EU's legal text on the backstop agreement of last December.
I think the EEA option still works the best, at least for the next 5-7 years while the nation figures out what it wants. Unfortunately Theresa is a nincompoop.
Like DD - although well-meaning, she's not up to the job and the job is difficult. I don't think any of the headbangers would accept 5-7 years of anything as that gives us a 2.
Wrong on both counts.
Though of course EEA will not continue for longer thsn the transition bour either
Deluded, as ever.
No, you are deluded.
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
No ships/tanks in Baghdad/etc
It was a statement of the obvious, no opposition wins a general election without a big midterm lead and big local election gains, Corbyn is nowhere near achieving either
Not really a follower of politics, are you?
Clearly you aren't no, even Ted Heath had big poll leads in the late 1960s and won huge local election swings and he is the only example since WW2 of an opposition leader without a big poll lead in the final polls winning a majority in a general election
Macmillan had a bigger lead in late 1960 yet the Tories went on to lose the 1964 election. Moreover Labour performed better in 1992 than polls were suggesting in 1988.Similarly the Tories did much better in 2005 than the polls were showing in mid 2002.
Wilson was not Labour leader then, he only took over in 1963 and he scraped home with a majority of just 4. Gaitskill may have lost again in 1964 on his second attempt like Corbyn will be.
Labour also did much better in local elections then than Corbyn has been.
Labour lost in 1992 and Major won more votes than any PM in history.
Howard got almost exactly the same voteshare as IDS was polling in 2002, just post Iraq a few Labour voters went LD
Labour actually performed poorly at the local elections in both 1960 and 1961 when they lost several hundred seats to the Tories. Labour lost in 1992 - but by nothing like the margin polls were showing in 1988. Had Thatcher not been ousted , it is likely that Kinnock would have been able to form a minority Government in 1992.
Labour lost in 1992 - but by nothing like the margin polls were showing in 1988. Had Thatcher not been ousted , it is likely that Kinnock would have been able to form a minority Government in 1992.
But Thatcher was ousted. As was IDS. Because the Tories are brutal at doing what is required to acquire and keep power.....
Comments
PeaceFudge in our time?Sadly there’s a small but very loud group of people who just want to see someone in prison, that attitude turns everyone involved from being constructive to being defensive.
Watch the remoaners turn on May now.
but they wont be ready in 9 months time will they
This does mean that an upfront deal on Ireland is probably dead - if the backstop is tariff agreement, there's no reason why the EU would want to look further.
Where is Terry Pratchett when you need him
With the entirely predictable consequence that law and order is now being broken down by scrotes on bikes.
This is a hard thing to say, but 'justice' is only of secondary importance. The vital thing has to be to learn the lessons of what occurred and prevent it happening again. Fortunately that occurred after Hillsborough, thanks to the Taylor Report. It will be interesting to see if the latest inquiry produces 'good' results.
posted earlier
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/industrieauftraege-fallen-den-vierten-monat-in-folge-15627464.html
So we will end up with a type of SM and a Customs Union with annual payments.
So the difference will be reduced FoM and no say and , of course, ECJ will stay.
But isn't that cherry picking ?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/technical-note-on-temporary-customs-arrangement
(Seems they want the "time limit" to be end of 2021, though as already noted, the whiff of fudge is strong)
"@tnewtondunn
I'm also now told the paper will make it clear HMG "expects" the backstop to end by 2021. But crucially there is NO hard commitment to this, just an aspiration. Will that be enough for the ERG?"
That shouldn't be a problem for Barnier. HMG can expect what it likes. Looks as if May has won.
I think it'll be acceptable as the can can be kicked down the road at that point.
not difficult though
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/taoiseach-faces-criticism-for-agreeing-to-visit-orange-order-hq-in-northern-ireland-36986079.html
https://mobile.twitter.com/DUPleader/status/1004697421224570881
By denying a concrete position going forward there is nothing for Nationalists to campaign against.
there will be a fudged agreement, the actors will all move on, new actors will appear and then the UK will continue to drift off
Cameron and Blair had double digit poll leads midterm before they won, Corbyn now does not even have a 1% poll lead.
The next general election will also be the equivalent of 1992 not 1997 in terms of time into government
Time limiting the agreement
26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.
It looks as if DD has some idea of how "a" (not "the") time limit could be delivered which he will discuss with Barnier. Good luck with that.
Fudge central. Remind me, what was the big row about ?
Meanwhile the EU has agreed to nothing.
An example:
Based on the Brexit result, the Tory party had a policy to enact the will of the British (sic) people. Now two years later, based on reduced parliamentary representation, talentlessness and incompetence, they have a reduced capability to carry this out.
At Grenfell, there’s going to be a long chain of events, procurement processes, building standards, facade design, suitability and legality of materials, the interaction and installation etc.
Unless there’s a smoking human gun somewhere (think of the Challenger disaster, where serious objections were presented and overruled) prosecuting people isn’t going to be the answer, the legacy of the sad events at Grenfell should be improved building standards and reactions to fires, much as the legacy of Hillsborough was safer football stadia with fixed seating.
As an immediate safety action, I would suggest that externally cladded buildings be evacuated in short order following discovery of a fire.
As an aside, there was a big hotel fire over here a couple of years ago, The Address Hotel. Fortunately given the scale of the fire, there was but a single casualty, a firefighter. The major issue with the spread of the fire was chased down to the cladding material being substandard, when compared to the sample that had been tested by authorities before the building was constructed. It turned out that the sample came from the cladding company’s US factory, whereas the production of the hotel’s panels were subcontracted to a local factory - those panels weren’t tested and were clearly more flammable than they should have been.
Taking on Western Europe's biggest social and economic problem in one hit is nuts.
Plus the DUP or Sinn Fein will permanently hold a balance of power in the Dail.
Do you hand all your money to the puritans or to the Mafia ?
I'm not clear about the bit that says we can sign deals with others on areas not affected by the customs agreement - are there lots of such things?
The EU ... *should* agree to this.
Nick Palmer's assessment is accurate.
The only thing that could conceivably make much difference with money, is if the Met were to buy a couple of dozen more helicopters. Better just to tell the scrotes that we will chase them down, and send the mayor out to comfort their families later...
Two "is clear"s in a short paragraph does not bode well.
It takes a really odd swing this time round for that not at least to result in a minority Labour Gov't.
Though Tories would not be too upset by largest party and Corbyn propped up by the LDs and SNP
But seriously, I want to be shot of this fucking mess of a union ASAP but unfortunately it does not seem like the rest of the people of Scotland agree with me. And to have a chance it has to be done sooner rather than later otherwise all the EU citizens who were conned into supporting the union in 2014 will be frozen out of the franchise for the next attempt.
But by fudging and fudging and fudging it removes the necessary red lines from the SNP case for a 2nd indyref even if the eventual result will hit the redlines in years to come.
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1004704407538360320
Labour also did much better in local elections then than Corbyn has been.
Labour lost in 1992 and Major won more votes than any PM in history.
Howard got almost exactly the same voteshare as IDS was polling in 2002, just post Iraq a few Labour voters went LD
Besides we've been told on this very forum that betrayal of Brexit will lead to rioting and stringing up. Perhaps we can slip away while the gammony insurrection takes place in Brexitland.
It was significant that TM had meetings on the draft text with the key Tory Remainers before she showed it to Boris et al. I don't think the "concession" she has made to DD materially alters the consequence of this proposal to the EU. I can't see why the EU won't accept this as a backstop proposal. It gives them what they want. They can recognise HMG's expectation, and know that it is hopelessly optimistic but hey ho so what.
FWIW I think that the UK will find it much easier to suit itself once we are out of the EU. At the moment we are tied in in so many ways and the usual nothing is agreed until everything is agreed gives the EU substantial advantages. That will not always be the case.
CDU/CSU 33%
SPD 17%
AfD 16%
Left 11%
Greens 11%
FDP 9%
The SPD are increasingly looking terminal. Their leader is hopeless, they will get hit by staying coalition and they have no policies. How do they turn that round ?
I mean I realise that the environment is febrile but the real time reporting often doesn't do anyone any favours.
a deal will get done and the world will move on
@smitajamdar: The Artist Formerly Known As The Customs Union. https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1004709233521250304
1. We agree to stay in the Customs Union until we agree to split it. But:
2. The EU doesn't want to split it. So:
3. We stay.
Fair enough.
CDU/CSU 32.7%
SPD 17.3%
AfD 14.6%
Greens 12.0%
Left 10.7%
FDP 8.2%
Others 4.5%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_German_federal_election#Poll_results
NEW THREAD
Labour lost in 1992 - but by nothing like the margin polls were showing in 1988. Had Thatcher not been ousted , it is likely that Kinnock would have been able to form a minority Government in 1992.