Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A week is a long time in politics

SystemSystem Posts: 11,683
edited July 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A week is a long time in politics

History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. Then after that, and if we are being punished for some serious crimes committed in a previous life, it descends into whatever this is.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    First, and thanks, Corporeal!
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    2nd. Like the new EU vote.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,970
    Nice work!
    Quibble. It was Hodge not Beckett as the Margaret in question.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited July 2018
    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    Blimey. Bleak.

    But sadly, possibly correct.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited July 2018
    It’s Cameron’s fault. Believed his own hype. We’d all have been better off if he’d lost in 2015. Instead we get Corbyn, Brexit and no free owls.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    What happens if turnout at a second referendum is much lower than before?
  • Options
    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
  • Options
    brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    AndyJS said:

    What happens if turnout at a second referendum is much lower than before?

    There could of course be an organised boycott I suppose. Do we all keep voting until we vote the right way?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s Cameron’s fault. Believed his own hype. We’d all have been better off if he’d lost in 2015. Instead we get Corbyn, Brexit and no free owls.

    I am constantly surprised by the exculpation of Cameron and Osborne. The first is treated much better than Blair, the second is feted as a surprisingly amusing editor of the Standard, and maybe a prince across the water, still...

    They completely fucked up the renegotiation, and then they consequently lost the referendum from an unloseable position, and then they waltzed away from the aftermath? Pair of wankers.
    To be fair, Osborne apparently told Cameron that a Referendum was a crazy idea.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    SeanT said:

    Fair play. Some nice gags.

    It is, indeed, a sorry epoch in British politics. We are a nation of donkeys led by newts.

    donkeys without their owls...
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s Cameron’s fault. Believed his own hype. We’d all have been better off if he’d lost in 2015. Instead we get Corbyn, Brexit and no free owls.

    I am constantly surprised by the exculpation of Cameron and Osborne. The first is treated much better than Blair, the second is feted as a surprisingly amusing editor of the Standard, and maybe a prince across the water, still...

    They completely fucked up the renegotiation, and then they consequently lost the referendum from an unloseable position, and then they waltzed away from the aftermath? Pair of wankers.
    Cameron is shockingly bad. Thought he could walk on water after the surprise majority. Got lazy. Fucked up and fucked off.


  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s Cameron’s fault. Believed his own hype. We’d all have been better off if he’d lost in 2015. Instead we get Corbyn, Brexit and no free owls.

    I am constantly surprised by the exculpation of Cameron and Osborne. The first is treated much better than Blair, the second is feted as a surprisingly amusing editor of the Standard, and maybe a prince across the water, still...

    They completely fucked up the renegotiation, and then they consequently lost the referendum from an unloseable position, and then they waltzed away from the aftermath? Pair of wankers.
    To be fair, Osborne apparently told Cameron that a Referendum was a crazy idea.
    If it wasn't in 2016, it would have happened sooner or later.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    Or in.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s Cameron’s fault. Believed his own hype. We’d all have been better off if he’d lost in 2015. Instead we get Corbyn, Brexit and no free owls.

    I am constantly surprised by the exculpation of Cameron and Osborne. The first is treated much better than Blair, the second is feted as a surprisingly amusing editor of the Standard, and maybe a prince across the water, still...

    They completely fucked up the renegotiation, and then they consequently lost the referendum from an unloseable position, and then they waltzed away from the aftermath? Pair of wankers.
    To be fair, Osborne apparently told Cameron that a Referendum was a crazy idea.
    If it wasn't in 2016, it would have happened sooner or later.
    Reluctantly, I agree.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    edited July 2018
    I think anyone would be lying if they claimed to know with any degree of certainty how the Brexit clusterfuck will play out.

    But it seems to me it would take a MIRACLE for the Tories to come out of this not looking terrible.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,311
    Cornwall is to date the only English county I haven't visited by train - only reached as far west as Newton Abbot and Paignton - but I hope to rectify this in the next few weeks :)
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    Yeh, that has aged so well...
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,970
    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s Cameron’s fault. Believed his own hype. We’d all have been better off if he’d lost in 2015. Instead we get Corbyn, Brexit and no free owls.

    I am constantly surprised by the exculpation of Cameron and Osborne. The first is treated much better than Blair, the second is feted as a surprisingly amusing editor of the Standard, and maybe a prince across the water, still...

    They completely fucked up the renegotiation, and then they consequently lost the referendum from an unloseable position, and then they waltzed away from the aftermath? Pair of wankers.
    To be fair, Osborne apparently told Cameron that a Referendum was a crazy idea.
    If it wasn't in 2016, it would have happened sooner or later.
    Yes. But it did not have to happen when it did. Dave wanted it quickly so the Tories could "re-unite" ()ha ha) for a 2020 election. As a result his re-negotiation was rushed and ineffective.
    The campaign was perfunctory (contrast with Indyref), so the question of what kind of Leave was never aired properly, and it was treated by the Media as a battle between 2 Tory tribes, with contrasting voices getting little air time.
    No Leave position was therefore on the ballot. Just a theoretical "Leave". The same could be said for Remain.
    These were Dave's decisions.
    They were poor, and on him.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850
    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s Cameron’s fault. Believed his own hype. We’d all have been better off if he’d lost in 2015. Instead we get Corbyn, Brexit and no free owls.

    I am constantly surprised by the exculpation of Cameron and Osborne. The first is treated much better than Blair, the second is feted as a surprisingly amusing editor of the Standard, and maybe a prince across the water, still...

    They completely fucked up the renegotiation, and then they consequently lost the referendum from an unloseable position, and then they waltzed away from the aftermath? Pair of wankers.
    To be fair, Osborne apparently told Cameron that a Referendum was a crazy idea.
    If it wasn't in 2016, it would have happened sooner or later.
    Thing is, it should have happened SOONER. Either over Maastricht or Lisbon. Europhiles will never admit this, because they are lying c*nts, but if we had had a vote SOONER we would have said NO to integration, we'd have stepped back from the EU without leaving entirely, and then Lisbon and Article 50 would never have existed, and we wouldn't be in the shit like we are now

    We were, as a nation, betrayed by two generations of europhile quislings, from Heseltine to Major to Clarke to Blair and Cameron. And now they rant at the result of their own anti-democratic wankery.

    Pfff.
    True, but there's no point wishing things were other than they are.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,226

    I think anyone would be lying if they claimed to know with any degree of certainty how the Brexit clusterfuck will play out.

    But it seems to me it would take a MIRACLE for the Tories to come out of this not looking terrible.

    :+1:
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, could at least be argued to not be the same thing. It isn't being in someone else's pocket that is necessarily the problem, but who's pocket. Now, many would argue the DUP are not a great pocket to be in, and that is true, but they are at least not formally committed to breaking up the UK.
  • Options
    MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    Or in.
    If there were to be a no-deal Brexit, does the current administration have the organisation and competence to deal speedily with the 1001 issues that will crop up?

    And for the "big issue" - if that does happen, do they have the vision and unity that would be required to re-orient Britain's place in the world? There are viable alternatives to the EU/EEA - not saying cost-free, but an option like "Singapore-on-Sea" or some other model that makes the position rather more workable. Yet that would require a kind of radical reshaping I don't see the current Tory party as having the courage of conviction to carry through.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    AndyJS said:

    What happens if turnout at a second referendum is much lower than before?

    I think if there ever was a second referendum, Leave would just boycott it. They would say it was already decided and if the establishment didn’t listen the first time, there is no point taking part. So the referendum would solve nothing.

    The only point of a referendum is to provide democratic legitimacy - if Leave denied the ability to get such legitimacy by not taking part it would be pointless.

    People need to forget about it. There won’t be a second referendum.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    A fun read on our dark and turbulent times. Depression sets in soon enough, but sometimes we just have to laugh at the fact that the light is visible at the end of the tunnel, both ends in fact, but only because they are on fire.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    Or in.
    If there were to be a no-deal Brexit, does the current administration have the organisation and competence to deal speedily with the 1001 issues that will crop up?

    And for the "big issue" - if that does happen, do they have the vision and unity that would be required to re-orient Britain's place in the world? There are viable alternatives to the EU/EEA - not saying cost-free, but an option like "Singapore-on-Sea" or some other model that makes the position rather more workable. Yet that would require a kind of radical reshaping I don't see the current Tory party as having the courage of conviction to carry through.
    So far, I would say not.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,970
    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, could at least be argued to not be the same thing. It isn't being in someone else's pocket that is necessarily the problem, but who's pocket. Now, many would argue the DUP are not a great pocket to be in, and that is true, but they are at least not formally committed to breaking up the UK.
    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    I think anyone would be lying if they claimed to know with any degree of certainty how the Brexit clusterfuck will play out.

    But it seems to me it would take a MIRACLE for the Tories to come out of this not looking terrible.

    It always seemed to me to be one of those situations where whoever was in office at the time would then be out for quite some time, because every option would involve some people very pissed off (some more than others), and since it was always going to be difficult and chaotic, with some practical costs, when those costs hit the government of the day would take a hit there as well. The incompetence has been higher than hoped, and so the chaos and likely costs even higher as well, so for the Tories to not end up looking terrible requires a Jesus level miracle I am thinking.
    SeanT said:

    I think anyone would be lying if they claimed to know with any degree of certainty how the Brexit clusterfuck will play out.

    But it seems to me it would take a MIRACLE for the Tories to come out of this not looking terrible.

    Try this. A very interesting take on the EU, from a once europhile centre lefty, who voted Remain but kinda regrets it:

    https://twitter.com/danieljohnsalt/status/1020385035613065217
    For me one of the biggest failings of the EU has always been that when things get tough they make noises that they need to change, or accept there are problems, but like any government and institution once the heat is off they get very lazy, whine about populism and indulge in comforting arrogance, which prevents them from living up to their own dreams of what they could be.

    It would have been interesting if Brexit actually forced them to reflect a little, and even perhaps become the kind of organisation that, ironically, people in the UK would not want to have left in the first place, but when you read the comments from people who act like the EU is the source of all decency and culture in the world, and that the EU commission believes it as well, and the comments from the more militant pro EU people who don't even pretend it is a good organisation (the comments about how ruthless they will be, how inevitable it is, how they don't give a damn about large countries on their doorsteps), we know that won't happen.

    And yet somehow the Tories by their inability to arrive at a position to try to sell to the public in the first place, that's still not looking that bad.

    Night all
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,970

    Sean_F said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    Or in.
    If there were to be a no-deal Brexit, does the current administration have the organisation and competence to deal speedily with the 1001 issues that will crop up?

    And for the "big issue" - if that does happen, do they have the vision and unity that would be required to re-orient Britain's place in the world? There are viable alternatives to the EU/EEA - not saying cost-free, but an option like "Singapore-on-Sea" or some other model that makes the position rather more workable. Yet that would require a kind of radical reshaping I don't see the current Tory party as having the courage of conviction to carry through.
    There aren't the votes for "Singapore-on-Sea". The 2017 GE should have showm that. Even if this current shower could outline and legislate for it, they'd be swimming against the tide of public opinion. The Leave voters of Stoke and Sunderland weren't stampeding to the polls for tax and spending cuts, removal of employment rights and de-regulation.
    Would be electoral suicide.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited July 2018
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am dxt.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    The

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, could at least be argued to not be the same thing. It isn't being in someone else's pocket that is necessarily the problem, but who's pocket. Now, many would argue the DUP are not a great pocket to be in, and that is true, but they are at least not formally committed to breaking up the UK.
    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.
    And that is fine, but while the situations are applicable to one another, they are not directly comparable. It's fine to not be comfortable with being in the DUP's pocket - though I think there is a high degree of overdoing it, political alliances are not inherently scary or unreasonable as countless examples in the world will show us - but it is not ridiculous to suggest there might be a difference between who you ally with when determining if that is a bad thing or not. Any number of examples once again show parties the world over are fine with working with some parties, even ideological opponents, rather than some specific alternatives. People thinking it no ok to be in the AfD's pocket for instance, to use the same parlance, but ok to be in someone elses.

    Allying with someone else is not automatically a bad thing. Obviously in our system where it is rarely needed nobody wants to admit in advance it can work, so they say working with someone else is bad. But it doesn't have to be, so surely has to bejudged on merit each time. Would working with the SNP have been bad? Some will say no, clearly the Tories thought it a winning line back then.

    Is working with the DUP bad? Well, how much influence have the DUP had which is negative is the question. The extra money is not much in the grand scheme of things, what else have they had influence on? Not the hard border in the Irish sea thing, since we know not just they care about that.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,970
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, could at least be argued to not be the same thing. It isn't being in someone else's pocket that is necessarily the problem, but who's pocket. Now, many would argue the DUP are not a great pocket to be in, and that is true, but they are at least not formally committed to breaking up the UK.
    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.
    And that is fine, but while the situations are applicable to one another, they are not directly comparable. It's fine to not be comfortable with being in the DUP's pocket - though I think there is a high degree of overdoing it, political alliances are not inherently scary or unreasonable as countless examples in the world will show us - but it is not ridiculous to suggest there might be a difference between who you ally with when determining if that is a bad thing or not. Any number of examples once again show parties the world over are fine with working with some parties, even ideological opponents, rather than some specific alternatives. People thinking it no ok to be in the AfD's pocket for instance, to use the same parlance, but ok to be in someone elses
    Is it fine to be in the ERG's pocket? 'Cos the DUP fine. I don't like it, but it was the GE result, I will accept it.
    But no-one voted for JRM and his Merrie Persons to set policy.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, coeaking up the UK.
    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.
    And that is ne elses
    Is it fine to be in the ERG's pocket? 'Cos the DUP fine. I don't like it, but it was the GE result, I will accept it.
    But no-one voted for JRM and his Merrie Persons to set policy.
    Well that is something we always have to live with. Since when do we the voters get to dictate how internal party politics will play out over the course of a parliament? When Turnball replaced Abbott, or Gillard replaced Rudd, due to party machinations did Australian voters really get to weigh in on the internal battles that were causing all that ruckus? When we vote for our MP we probably have no idea which party faction they belong to, and certainly no idea how they might shift depending on developments over time. I don't like that the ERG lot seem to be driving the show, but party drama is not something we have much influence on. If parties could not shift around with their factions no one could ever rebel from the manifesto all were elected on, and yet we know for a fact some people get elected on such without even supporting their own party position.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,311
    SeanT said:

    Cornwall is to date the only English county I haven't visited by train - only reached as far west as Newton Abbot and Paignton - but I hope to rectify this in the next few weeks :)

    Cornwall has the BEST little branch lines! The train to Looe, the Truro offshoot down to Falmouth. It's heaven for railway enthusiasts. GO!

    https://greatscenicrailways.co.uk/lines/looe-valley-line/
    Thanks! I already have a game-plan, albeit requiring a stay across the border in Plymouth:
    day one would take in Penzance and St Ives
    day two Falmouth and Newquay
    the final day Looe (plus Gunnislake).
  • Options
    MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited July 2018
    dixiedean said:


    There aren't the votes for "Singapore-on-Sea". The 2017 GE should have showm that. Even if this current shower could outline and legislate for it, they'd be swimming against the tide of public opinion. The Leave voters of Stoke and Sunderland weren't stampeding to the polls for tax and spending cuts, removal of employment rights and de-regulation.
    Would be electoral suicide.

    Not citing it because of personal preference or because I thought it would sell electorally, merely as one possible example - and I picked that one because I think it's the closest the current cabinet have got to endorsing an alternative, when Hammond gave a "warning" to the EU that the UK would feel compelled to respond to a no-deal scenario by focusing on competitiveness.

    To be fair, it isn't voters in Sunderland that the Tories will be worried of. But my point was precisely that even if Hammond started arguing that now is the time to start aping Singapore (I'm not sure that he would, he didn't seem to have much conviction in his threat - or any hint of follow-up in terms of contingency preparations) then I don't know whether he'd even be able to sell it to the current cabinet, let alone the good denizens of Sunderland, and I would rate it as extremely unlikely he could sway his own backbenchers. On the other hand, I'm not sure I can see any other model that the whole Tory party would swing behind either.

    If Labour took office in an election after no-deal, it is not beyond belief that they will do so on the back of selling a "big picture" of how they are going to transform Britain to make its new situation work out. Again, not saying the plan would actually work and am sure plenty of PBers would see any Corbynite plan as incredibly destructive, but my point is simply that one can imagine Labour coming up with an alternative vision, largely uniting around it, and actually selling it. Maybe even making an honest attempt to implement it. It's rather harder to imagine the Tory party in its current state accomplishing any of those things.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    edited July 2018

    dixiedean said:


    There aren't the votes for "Singapore-on-Sea". The 2017 GE should have showm that. Even if this current shower could outline and legislate for it, they'd be swimming against the tide of public opinion. The Leave voters of Stoke and Sunderland weren't stampeding to the polls for tax and spending cuts, removal of employment rights and de-regulation.
    Would be electoral suicide.

    Not citing it because of personal preference or because I thought it would sell electorally, merely as one possible example - and I picked that one because I think it's the closest the current cabinet have got to endorsing an alternative, when Hammond gave a "warning" to the EU that the UK would feel compelled to respond to a no-deal scenario by focusing on competitiveness.

    To be fair, it isn't voters in Sunderland that the Tories will be worried of. But my point was precisely that even if Hammond started arguing that now is the time to start aping Singapore (I'm not sure that he would, he didn't seem to have much conviction in his threat - or any hint of follow-up in terms of contingency preparations) then I don't know whether he'd even be able to sell it to the current cabinet, let alone the good denizens of Sunderland, and I would rate it as extremely unlikely he could sway his own backbenchers. On the other hand, I'm not sure I can see any other model that the whole Tory party would swing behind either.

    If Labour took office in an election after no-deal, it is not beyond belief that they will do so on the back of selling a "big picture" of how they are going to transform Britain to make its new situation work out. Again, not saying the plan would actually work and am sure plenty of PBers would see any Corbynite plan as incredibly destructive, but my point is simply that one can imagine Labour coming up with an alternative vision, largely uniting around it, and actually selling it. Maybe even making an honest attempt to implement it. It's rather harder to imagine the Tory party in its current state accomplishing any of those things.
    Yes hard Brexit, out of the single market and socialism. That would be Britain under Corbyn and McDonnell
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,970
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, coeaking up the UK.

    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.

    And that is ne elses

    Is it fine to be in the ERG's pocket? 'Cos the DUP fine. I don't like it, but it was the GE result, I will accept it.
    But no-one voted for JRM and his Merrie Persons to set policy.

    Well that is something we always have to live with. Since when do we the voters get to dictate how internal party politics will play out over the course of a parliament? When Turnball replaced Abbott, or Gillard replaced Rudd, due to party machinations did Australian voters really get to weigh in on the internal battles that were causing all that ruckus? When we vote for our MP we probably have no idea which party faction they belong to, and certainly no idea how they might shift depending on developments over time. I don't like that the ERG lot seem to be driving the show, but party drama is not something we have much influence on. If parties could not shift around with their factions no one could ever rebel from the manifesto all were elected on, and yet we know for a fact some people get elected on such without even supporting their own party position.

    Fair enough. Am begining to believe ihat multi-member STV may be an option, then we can at least rank those preferences.
    Used to be we voted Labour or Tory with some idea of the consequences.
    Soubry/JRM and Corbyn/Ummuna seem light years apart,
    And now I must wish you good night.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,970
    edited July 2018

    dixiedean said:


    There aren't the votes for "Singapore-on-Sea". The 2017 GE should have showm that. Even if this current shower could outline and legislate for it, they'd be swimming against the tide of public opinion. The Leave voters of Stoke and Sunderland weren't stampeding to the polls for tax and spending cuts, removal of employment rights and de-regulation.
    Would be electoral suicide.

    Not citing it because of personal preference or because I thought it would sell electorally, merely as one possible example - and I picked that one because I think it's the closest the current cabinet have got to endorsing an alternative, when Hammond gave a "warning" to the EU that the UK would feel compelled to respond to a no-deal scenario by focusing on competitiveness.

    To be fair, it isn't voters in Sunderland that the Tories will be worried of. But my point was precisely that even if Hammond started arguing that now is the time to start aping Singapore (I'm not sure that he would, he didn't seem to have much conviction in his threat - or any hint of follow-up in terms of contingency preparations) then I don't know whether he'd even be able to sell it to the current cabinet, let alone the good denizens of Sunderland, and I would rate it as extremely unlikely he could sway his own backbenchers. On the other hand, I'm not sure I can see any other model that the whole Tory party would swing behind either.

    If Labour took office in an election after no-deal, it is not beyond belief that they will do so on the back of selling a "big picture" of how they are going to transform Britain to make its new situation work out. Again, not saying the plan would actually work and am sure plenty of PBers would see any Corbynite plan as incredibly destructive, but my point is simply that one can imagine Labour coming up with an alternative vision, largely uniting around it, and actually selling it. Maybe even making an honest attempt to implement it. It's rather harder to imagine the Tory party in its current state accomplishing any of those things.
    Well,in which case you are right.
    The Leave vote was undoubtedly for Change. Continuity Remain offers minimal to no change
    If the best the Tories can come up with is more Singapore, then it will have to be a different kind of change.
    Corbyn it will be then.
    A job well done.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,995
    What an excellent header. Well done Mr C.
  • Options
    MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited July 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    What an excellent header. Well done Mr C.

    It's brilliant - but do you (or someone else with editing power) fancy changing "When this lead to Margaret ***** calling Jeremy Corbyn an anti-semite and a racist" to the correct Margaret Hodge? Probably worth making this change for legal reasons I would suggest....

    (for the pedants, you might try changing "lead" to "led" while you're at it!)
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,311

    rcs1000 said:

    What an excellent header. Well done Mr C.

    It's brilliant - but do you (or someone else with editing power) fancy changing "When this lead to Margaret ***** calling Jeremy Corbyn an anti-semite and a racist" to the correct Margaret Hodge? Probably worth making this change for legal reasons I would suggest....

    (for the pedants, you might try changing "lead" to "led" while you're at it!)
    Branon Lewis?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003
    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    RobD said:

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
    Nice symmetry between saving £11 and spending £11 billion.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
    Nice symmetry between saving £11 and spending £11 billion.
    It saved them £11 on average, but cost them £400+? So paid off after 40 years... very nice.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003
    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
    Nice symmetry between saving £11 and spending £11 billion.
    It saved them £11 on average, but cost them £400+? So paid off after 40 years... very nice.
    I would doubt the devices would last that long before the tech breaks or becomes obsolete.

    It was a marginal idea, poorly implemented; in fact, it's hard to see how it cost so much technology-wise: the 'costs' must be on installation and operation.

    (For the purposes of clarity, many moons ago Mrs J spent a couple of years developing a chip for this sort of apparatus.)
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    Yes, and I expect it will be the same with water meters: their installation is just another cost that has to be met from water bills.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    edited July 2018
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, could at least be argued to not be the same thing. It isn't being in someone else's pocket that is necessarily the problem, but who's pocket. Now, many would argue the DUP are not a great pocket to be in, and that is true, but they are at least not formally committed to breaking up the UK.
    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.
    Sorry, but on what planet? May has just proposed a Soft Brexit that both the ERG and DUP oppose.

    The problem is not the ERG or the DUP. The problem is, as I have been pointing out for months, that there is no such thing as Soft Brexit and May has just proven it. There is BINO (eg EEA plus CU) or Hard Brexit (CETA or No Deal).

    The remainers have been whining for two years about the 'headbangers' and how we could have Soft Brexit of only the 'grown ups' could take charge and 'compromise' with the EU. And now, as we told you all along, it doesn't work. And that is somehow the fault of the Leavers. SMH.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Great thread header., very amusing.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    The smart meter business wasn't thought thro, it doesn't work if you switch suppliers(apparently) they cant fit one in my house for technical;reasons.. WTF.(the board is apparently TOO SMALL... wtf. Chaotic as usual from Govt
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,046
    Didn't know Corporeal was still on here!
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,046
    Just finished the article. Must say it is excellent. 'Impossibly vague vs vaguely impossible'

    I'll get a lot of grief for this but I actually quite like Barnier. I think he's been as straight with us as we might have been able to expect.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Good morning, everyone.

    Enjoyed the article, not least the concluding implied support for the principle of Enormo-Haddock Voting :D
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,242

    Just finished the article. Must say it is excellent. 'Impossibly vague vs vaguely impossible'

    I'll get a lot of grief for this but I actually quite like Barnier. I think he's been as straight with us as we might have been able to expect.

    Well, he was the first French Minister of Agriculture to admit what we all knew - that France had more BSE than the rest of the world put together.

    However, he was also the French Minister of Agriculture who flatly refused to pay the €1.5 billion in fines for a highly illegal ban imposed on our beef, at which point the spineless EU legal system caved in and waived the fine.

    I don't think I'd call him straight. More honest and more sober than Juncker, perhaps, but that's like saying someone is less murderous than Idi Amin.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, could at least be argued to not be the same thing. It isn't being in someone else's pocket that is necessarily the problem, but who's pocket. Now, many would argue the DUP are not a great pocket to be in, and that is true, but they are at least not formally committed to breaking up the UK.
    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.
    Sorry, but on what planet? May has just proposed a Soft Brexit that both the ERG and DUP oppose.

    The problem is not the ERG or the DUP. The problem is, as I have been pointing out for months, that there is no such thing as Soft Brexit and May has just proven it. There is BINO (eg EEA plus CU) or Hard Brexit (CETA or No Deal).

    The remainers have been whining for two years about the 'headbangers' and how we could have Soft Brexit of only the 'grown ups' could take charge and 'compromise' with the EU. And now, as we told you all along, it doesn't work. And that is somehow the fault of the Leavers. SMH.

    You told us we would get all the benefits of being in the EU with none of the downsides. You said we would hold all the negotiating cards; that getting a brilliant free trade deal would be the easiest thing in the world to do. You were totally wrong.

  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,718
    edited July 2018

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    It’s gonna get worse before it gets better. We will look back on May and Corbyn with wistful fondness. A kinder , more sensible age.

    I am deeply pessimistic. Corbyn's time hasn't come yet. Brexit will almost certainly be hard, and a hammer blow to British industry. The Tories will own Brexit, just as Labour owned the Iraq war, and will be punished for it at the next election. Corbyn will ride to power and complete the destruction of British industry with his well-meaning but economically suicidal policies. Heaven knows what comes next.
    New Statesman this week reports that focus groups are coming back loud and clear: Brexit is seen as totally owned by the Tories.

    They will live or die by the end result.

    Conservatives could be out of power for a generation.
    It took the Tories just one year of governing alone to create the chaos they promised to save us from. That’s impressive.


    https://twitter.com/david_cameron/status/595112367358406656?s=21
    There was also the stuff about Miliband being in the pocket of SNP.

    Hello? May and DUP?
    That, at least, could at least be argued to not be the same thing. It isn't being in someone else's pocket that is necessarily the problem, but who's pocket. Now, many would argue the DUP are not a great pocket to be in, and that is true, but they are at least not formally committed to breaking up the UK.
    I would suggest that is somewhat sophistic. Right now we are in the pocket of an ERG/DUP axis.
    Not a theoretical alternative history one.
    I, for one, am ucomfortable with that.
    Sorry, but on what planet? May has just proposed a Soft Brexit that both the ERG and DUP oppose.

    The problem is not the ERG or the DUP. The problem is, as I have been pointing out for months, that there is no such thing as Soft Brexit and May has just proven it. There is BINO (eg EEA plus CU) or Hard Brexit (CETA or No Deal).

    The remainers have been whining for two years about the 'headbangers' and how we could have Soft Brexit of only the 'grown ups' could take charge and 'compromise' with the EU. And now, as we told you all along, it doesn't work. And that is somehow the fault of the Leavers. SMH.
    I don't think hard and soft are useful terms for Brexit. There is destructive Brexit and there is damage limited Brexit, on the split you have set out. The choice isn't an easy one because, more importantly, there isn't a Brexit outcome that doesn't leave the UK in a worse place than it was before. There is also no such thing as Brexit in Name Only.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,718

    Just finished the article. Must say it is excellent. 'Impossibly vague vs vaguely impossible'

    I'll get a lot of grief for this but I actually quite like Barnier. I think he's been as straight with us as we might have been able to expect.

    Barnier is tactless but he is free of crap unlike most of the other operators in a Brexit of crap.
  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    Thanks for your kind words, I may print out and frame SeanTs glowing review. Trying to work my way back into writing more.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
    Nice symmetry between saving £11 and spending £11 billion.
    It saved them £11 on average, but cost them £400+? So paid off after 40 years... very nice.
    I would doubt the devices would last that long before the tech breaks or becomes obsolete.

    It was a marginal idea, poorly implemented; in fact, it's hard to see how it cost so much technology-wise: the 'costs' must be on installation and operation.

    (For the purposes of clarity, many moons ago Mrs J spent a couple of years developing a chip for this sort of apparatus.)
    No doubt it'll have been money better spent than improving transport in the north though...
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003
    Pulpstar said:

    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
    Nice symmetry between saving £11 and spending £11 billion.
    It saved them £11 on average, but cost them £400+? So paid off after 40 years... very nice.
    I would doubt the devices would last that long before the tech breaks or becomes obsolete.

    It was a marginal idea, poorly implemented; in fact, it's hard to see how it cost so much technology-wise: the 'costs' must be on installation and operation.

    (For the purposes of clarity, many moons ago Mrs J spent a couple of years developing a chip for this sort of apparatus.)
    No doubt it'll have been money better spent than improving transport in the north though...
    It's a different form of money. This won't be costing the government much, as it comes from increased bills from the consumer.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,046
    corporeal said:

    Thanks for your kind words, I may print out and frame SeanTs glowing review. Trying to work my way back into writing more.

    I can't remember whether you lived in Cardiff.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    F1: bad news, seems it's probably going to be dry for qualifying.
  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549

    corporeal said:

    Thanks for your kind words, I may print out and frame SeanTs glowing review. Trying to work my way back into writing more.

    I can't remember whether you lived in Cardiff.
    I used to live near Cardiff.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929

    Pulpstar said:

    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
    Nice symmetry between saving £11 and spending £11 billion.
    It saved them £11 on average, but cost them £400+? So paid off after 40 years... very nice.
    I would doubt the devices would last that long before the tech breaks or becomes obsolete.

    It was a marginal idea, poorly implemented; in fact, it's hard to see how it cost so much technology-wise: the 'costs' must be on installation and operation.

    (For the purposes of clarity, many moons ago Mrs J spent a couple of years developing a chip for this sort of apparatus.)
    No doubt it'll have been money better spent than improving transport in the north though...
    It's a different form of money. This won't be costing the government much, as it comes from increased bills from the consumer.
    I don't think I can have a smart meter as my panels preclude it. Also shouldn't the meter rollout save money as less meter readers need to be employed ?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    Off-topic:

    As predicted:

    Smart meters to cut energy bills by just £11, say MPs

    "Customers have financed the smart meter programme by paying a levy on their energy bills, while suppliers have frequently blamed the levy for rising costs.

    However the report claimed most of the eventual savings would be made by energy firms, rather than consumers."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44903471

    They spent £11bn on the program? Insanity.
    Nice symmetry between saving £11 and spending £11 billion.
    It saved them £11 on average, but cost them £400+? So paid off after 40 years... very nice.
    I would doubt the devices would last that long before the tech breaks or becomes obsolete.

    It was a marginal idea, poorly implemented; in fact, it's hard to see how it cost so much technology-wise: the 'costs' must be on installation and operation.

    (For the purposes of clarity, many moons ago Mrs J spent a couple of years developing a chip for this sort of apparatus.)
    No doubt it'll have been money better spent than improving transport in the north though...
    It's a different form of money. This won't be costing the government much, as it comes from increased bills from the consumer.
    I don't think I can have a smart meter as my panels preclude it. Also shouldn't the meter rollout save money as less meter readers need to be employed ?
    It'll be interesting to see if it decreases or increases costs; there are *lots* of things that could go wrong with such a complex system as the years roll on, and may require much more maintenance or board swapping-out.

    But you can guarantee that the costs of this wizard wheeze will be paid by the consumers. And people such as yourself will pay for it and not get any of the (marginal) advantages ...

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897
    Amusing start to a Saturday morning, well done @corporeal for the sketch of the week!
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,718
    We needed a chuckle in these depressing times, thank you Corporeal.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    Yeah, but apart from all that aren't things going well? Unemployment the lowest since 1975, public borrowing the lowest since 2007 and continuing to fall sharply, growth apparently picking up, inflation low?

    I struggle in my adult lifetime to recall a time when there was such a mismatch between an economy doing remarkably well and a government that gives chaos a bad name. Normally governments fall into chaos because they are struggling to cope with adverse economic events.

    Here, of course, it is Brexit. May's determination to avoid making decisions for the last 2 years has come home to roost. Will she find a way through to a vaguely credible if suboptimal deal? Who knows? It is a toss of a coin, it really is. We can only hope.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897

    F1: bad news, seems it's probably going to be dry for qualifying.

    Does that mean we might see rain tomorrow?
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    Brilliant. Thank you.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306

    SeanT said:

    Fair play. Some nice gags.

    It is, indeed, a sorry epoch in British politics. We are a nation of donkeys led by newts.

    donkeys without their owls...
    If only we had listened to Ed Miliband, eh?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Sandpit, Sunday forecast appears drier too. Could change, of course.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,205
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:


    There aren't the votes for "Singapore-on-Sea". The 2017 GE should have showm that. Even if this current shower could outline and legislate for it, they'd be swimming against the tide of public opinion. The Leave voters of Stoke and Sunderland weren't stampeding to the polls for tax and spending cuts, removal of employment rights and de-regulation.
    Would be electoral suicide.

    Not citing it because of personal preference or because I thought it would sell electorally, merely as one possible example - and I picked that one because I think it's the closest the current cabinet have got to endorsing an alternative, when Hammond gave a "warning" to the EU that the UK would feel compelled to respond to a no-deal scenario by focusing on competitiveness.

    To be fair, it isn't voters in Sunderland that the Tories will be worried of. But my point was precisely that even if Hammond started arguing that now is the time to start aping Singapore (I'm not sure that he would, he didn't seem to have much conviction in his threat - or any hint of follow-up in terms of contingency preparations) then I don't know whether he'd even be able to sell it to the current cabinet, let alone the good denizens of Sunderland, and I would rate it as extremely unlikely he could sway his own backbenchers. On the other hand, I'm not sure I can see any other model that the whole Tory party would swing behind either.

    If Labour took office in an election after no-deal, it is not beyond belief that they will do so on the back of selling a "big picture" of how they are going to transform Britain to make its new situation work out. Again, not saying the plan would actually work and am sure plenty of PBers would see any Corbynite plan as incredibly destructive, but my point is simply that one can imagine Labour coming up with an alternative vision, largely uniting around it, and actually selling it. Maybe even making an honest attempt to implement it. It's rather harder to imagine the Tory party in its current state accomplishing any of those things.
    Yes hard Brexit, out of the single market and socialism. That would be Britain under Corbyn and McDonnell
    And it will be the consequence of the Tories making an utter cock up of government since 2015. Thank you very much.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    edited July 2018
    On smart meters, it's a good example of Government governance.

    They encourage us and the utility companies to fit them, and they encourage us to switch suppliers to get the best deal.

    They are incompatible. My smart meter was installed in March and in May, I switched suppliers for a better deal. Result ... the smart meter no longer works. The old company were using this as a reason not to switch.

    Newer, more modern meters are coming in gradually, but never let politicians loose with science; they never understand it. It's like letting children loose with fireworks. And it's your money they're wasting.

    PS, they are compatible with solar panels. Another example of a politician's enthusiasm running away with him. Mine were fitted when Miliband had been let loose. I'm almost embarrassed to take all the money. Especially as it's the green tariff that is paying for it.


  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    DavidL said:

    Yeah, but apart from all that aren't things going well? Unemployment the lowest since 1975, public borrowing the lowest since 2007 and continuing to fall sharply, growth apparently picking up, inflation low?

    I struggle in my adult lifetime to recall a time when there was such a mismatch between an economy doing remarkably well and a government that gives chaos a bad name. Normally governments fall into chaos because they are struggling to cope with adverse economic events.

    Here, of course, it is Brexit. May's determination to avoid making decisions for the last 2 years has come home to roost. Will she find a way through to a vaguely credible if suboptimal deal? Who knows? It is a toss of a coin, it really is. We can only hope.

    The economy is not doing *that* well. Wages growth is only marginally above inflation, and this comes after an awful period of declining real incomes. Home ownership has declined. The economy still has its structural imbalances. We import too much and export too little. We have sold off so many of our national assets that we now remit more in dividends abroad then we receive from our foreign investments.

    Unemployment is low, but with poor wages and high living costs we have high levels of in-work poverty.

    The economy could certainly be doing a lot worse, but let's not fool ourselves that it's doing all that well.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    The last paragraphs of Corporeal's excellent piece raise another point. Governments work best where there is someone who has a genuine grip on them and can provide a sense of purpose. Osborne did that for Cameron, acting well beyond his Treasury brief to ensure discipline and a sense of common purpose. Mandelson did that for Brown in the second half of his Premiership giving some sense of movement to a government that had become paralysed by the horrors that were being piled onto it and his indecision/mental illness. Blair used the repulsive Alastair Campbell as a means of keeping everyone on message and vaguely coherent.

    May has no Machiavelli plotting to help her. She had the completely anonymous and pointless Damien Green who, despite having almost nothing to do still managed to screw up, then the even more anonymous David Lidington. Neither were or are even close to the legendary Willie Whitelaw who helped Maggie through so many difficult episodes. She cannot bring herself to work with her Chancellor who is boring and politically inept but despite that has some idea what he is doing. It is a government without a centre. Drift and apparent incompetence is inevitable.

    It's almost as if being locked up in the fortress of the Home Office where the main priority is always to avoid responsibility for a decision and to say as little as possible is not ideal training for a PM, isn't it?
  • Options
    surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    AndyJS said:

    What happens if turnout at a second referendum is much lower than before?

    It's the result that matters. Did a GE become invalid because the turnout fell ?
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,109
    edited July 2018

    Just finished the article. Must say it is excellent. 'Impossibly vague vs vaguely impossible'

    I'll get a lot of grief for this but I actually quite like Barnier. I think he's been as straight with us as we might have been able to expect.

    I think you'll be ok, Varadkar is the Brexit bête noire this week. We probably still have to churn through the Juncker/Tusk/Verhofstadt cycle before Barnier starts getting burnt in effigy again.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    DavidL said:

    May has no Machiavelli plotting to help her.

    She had 2

    They were rubbish
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612



    You told us we would get all the benefits of being in the EU with none of the downsides. You said we would hold all the negotiating cards; that getting a brilliant free trade deal would be the easiest thing in the world to do. You were totally wrong.

    I didn't tell you anything of the sort. What I told you is that the benefits of the SM are massively overrated and that the benefits of Brexit, if fully and properly implemented, would significantly outweigh the loss of SM membership. The evidence of actual trade patterns (as opposed to modelling) does not demonstrate that the SM makes any difference to long term GDP. I don't think that friction at customs is very material and that business can adapt. The benefits from managing our own trade policy and ditching protectionist EU policies will be very real. The EU know this, of course, which is why they are desperate to turn us into a vassal state.

    We do hold some significant negotiating cards. We could have achieved CETA plus services, which is perfect for the UK, if we had played them and linked the Brexit bill discussion to the outcome. We should also have withdrawn from negotiations immediately if the EU had refused to stop playing games with NI.

    But, the problem is, the proof is now out that the Leavers were not running the show and the Remainers were in charge, and they have completely, utterly failed. You, in particular, have gone on about Soft Brexit and how the 'grown ups' need to take control. Your people did exactly what you proposed, and it doesn't work. And your solution is to blame the Leavers who told you that this plan was not viable. Ridiculous.

    Why not let the people who actually voted Leave take over?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306

    DavidL said:

    Yeah, but apart from all that aren't things going well? Unemployment the lowest since 1975, public borrowing the lowest since 2007 and continuing to fall sharply, growth apparently picking up, inflation low?

    I struggle in my adult lifetime to recall a time when there was such a mismatch between an economy doing remarkably well and a government that gives chaos a bad name. Normally governments fall into chaos because they are struggling to cope with adverse economic events.

    Here, of course, it is Brexit. May's determination to avoid making decisions for the last 2 years has come home to roost. Will she find a way through to a vaguely credible if suboptimal deal? Who knows? It is a toss of a coin, it really is. We can only hope.

    The economy is not doing *that* well. Wages growth is only marginally above inflation, and this comes after an awful period of declining real incomes. Home ownership has declined. The economy still has its structural imbalances. We import too much and export too little. We have sold off so many of our national assets that we now remit more in dividends abroad then we receive from our foreign investments.

    Unemployment is low, but with poor wages and high living costs we have high levels of in-work poverty.

    The economy could certainly be doing a lot worse, but let's not fool ourselves that it's doing all that well.
    Sure, there is still work to do, especially on the trade balance which in turn requires us to reduce our excessive consumption and to invest more, but when I was younger there was something called the Misery index which involved adding the unemployment rate to the inflation rate. It was reported regularly on the news. I doubt it has ever been as low as it is right now. Lower unemployment in the mid 1970s was combined with substantial inflation.

    I did note that last year our government had a surplus on current spending. It spent roughly £41bn on capital investment but only ran a £39.7bn deficit. It is astonishing how comparatively painless the reduction in the deficit has been.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Why not let the people who actually voted Leave take over?

    They all ran away
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,288
    edited July 2018
    @Corporeal thanks for making me smile, particularly the last paragraph.

    Trouble is too many of the politicians think that carrying their papers upside down in a transparent folder is a responsible way of conducting themselves.




  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Although I'm now retired, I could do Barnier's job in my tea break.

    Sit back and demand the UK produces a plan. When it does, accept the bits you want anyway and reject the rest. Stick strictly to the EU guidelines and compromise on nothing. By doing so, you become a hero of the arch-Remainers in the UK for being firm.

    Stand WELL above the army of Eurocrats pretending to negotiate, but deign to have a few lavish dinners where you snigger about the deluded British.

    Yep, I reckon that's easily do-able.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    edited July 2018
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:


    There aren't the votes for "Singapore-on-Sea". The 2017 GE should have showm that. Even if this current shower could outline and legislate for it, they'd be swimming against the tide of public opinion. The Leave voters of Stoke and Sunderland weren't stampeding to the polls for tax and spending cuts, removal of employment rights and de-regulation.
    Would be electoral suicide.

    Not citing it because of personal preference or because I thought it would sell electorally, merely as one possible example - and I picked that one because I think it's the closest the current cabinet have got to endorsing an alternative, when Hammond gave a "warning" to the EU that the UK would feel compelled to respond to a no-deal scenario by focusing on competitiveness.

    To be fair, it isn't voters in Sunderland that the Tories will be worried of. But my point was precisely that even if Hammond started arguing that now is the time to start aping Singapore (I'm not sure that he would, he didn't seem to have much conviction in his threat - or any hint of follow-up in terms of contingency preparations) then I don't know whether he'd even be able to sell it to the current cabinet, let alone the good denizens of Sunderland, and I would rate it as extremely unlikely he could sway his own backbenchers. On the other hand, I'm not sure I can see any other model that the whole Tory party would swing behind either.

    If Labour took office in an election after no-deal, it is not beyond belief that they will do so on the back of selling a "big picture" of how they are going to transform Britain to make its new situation work out. Again, not saying the plan would actually work and am sure plenty of PBers would see any Corbynite plan as incredibly destructive, but my point is simply that one can imagine Labour coming up with an alternative vision, largely uniting around it, and actually selling it. Maybe even making an honest attempt to implement it. It's rather harder to imagine the Tory party in its current state accomplishing any of those things.
    Yes hard Brexit, out of the single market and socialism. That would be Britain under Corbyn and McDonnell
    And it will be the consequence of the Tories making an utter cock up of government since 2015. Thank you very much.
    Not at all. Borrowing is down, the deficit is down, unemployment is half the level Labour left in 2010, inflation is lower than in 2010, the NHS is getting a big investment in funds, GCSEs and A Levels have been toughened up and May has put forward a deal despite my reservations on it that is as far as can be gone to get a deal or at least a transition deal from the EU while respecting the Leave vote
  • Options
    Am I entirely alone in thinking that the whole Brexit farrago is about to be overtaken by events?

    It's ten years since the last recession started. We're overdue the next one, and Donald Trump seems to be doing all he can to hurry it along.

    The Euro system probably won't survive another major economic downturn, and the end of the common currency would, given both the febrile political atmosphere on the continent and the fact that the EU has already, of course, begun to break up, finish the EU itself off.

    It is by no means impossible that Theresa May - for whom, it seems, the Tories are incapable of finding a successor they can all agree on - will still be Prime Minister of the UK after the EU has disintegrated. As ever, it seems, we're so obsessed with our own problems that we don't stop to think about the state in which everybody else finds themselves.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    dr_spyn said:

    @Corporeal thanks for making me smile, particularly the last paragraph.

    Trouble is too many of the politicians think that carrying their papers upside down in a transparent folder is a responsible way of conducting themselves.




    It reminded me of a particularly excellent episode of Spongebob where somehow Spongebob is representing his boss at a trial and spends the entire trial trying to get the briefcase the real lawyer had given him open because the answer, apparently, was inside. One of the best court scenes ever.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,641
    DavidL said:

    Yeah, but apart from all that aren't things going well? Unemployment the lowest since 1975, public borrowing the lowest since 2007 and continuing to fall sharply, growth apparently picking up, inflation low?

    I struggle in my adult lifetime to recall a time when there was such a mismatch between an economy doing remarkably well and a government that gives chaos a bad name. Normally governments fall into chaos because they are struggling to cope with adverse economic events.

    Here, of course, it is Brexit. May's determination to avoid making decisions for the last 2 years has come home to roost. Will she find a way through to a vaguely credible if suboptimal deal? Who knows? It is a toss of a coin, it really is. We can only hope.

    The last years of the Major government are the parallel. The economy doing well, but on a background of cachectic public services, and a government that spends all its time banging on about internal conflicts over Europe.

    Blair and Jezza are different people, and I cannot see Jezza getting a 197 majority, but that is the way the wind is blowing. The economy will not save a Tory party that says "F*** Business".
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612
    Scott_P said:

    Why not let the people who actually voted Leave take over?

    They all ran away
    They resigned because they were being ignored (in fact deliberately lied to) by Remainers. They are ready and waiting to take over, which I assume they will in due course.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937



    You told us we would get all the benefits of being in the EU with none of the downsides. You said we would hold all the negotiating cards; that getting a brilliant free trade deal would be the easiest thing in the world to do. You were totally wrong.

    I didn't tell you anything of the sort. What I told you is that the benefits of the SM are massively overrated and that the benefits of Brexit, if fully and properly implemented, would significantly outweigh the loss of SM membership. The evidence of actual trade patterns (as opposed to modelling) does not demonstrate that the SM makes any difference to long term GDP. I don't think that friction at customs is very material and that business can adapt. The benefits from managing our own trade policy and ditching protectionist EU policies will be very real. The EU know this, of course, which is why they are desperate to turn us into a vassal state.

    We do hold some significant negotiating cards. We could have achieved CETA plus services, which is perfect for the UK, if we had played them and linked the Brexit bill discussion to the outcome. We should also have withdrawn from negotiations immediately if the EU had refused to stop playing games with NI.

    But, the problem is, the proof is now out that the Leavers were not running the show and the Remainers were in charge, and they have completely, utterly failed. You, in particular, have gone on about Soft Brexit and how the 'grown ups' need to take control. Your people did exactly what you proposed, and it doesn't work. And your solution is to blame the Leavers who told you that this plan was not viable. Ridiculous.

    Why not let the people who actually voted Leave take over?

    Leavers thought the UK could do trade deals with individual EU member states. They claimed German car manufacturers would be telling Merkel to sign a trade agreement with us the day after Brexit. They claimed the UK held all the negotiating cards. They were, in short, utterly deluded.

  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yeah, but apart from all that aren't things going well? Unemployment the lowest since 1975, public borrowing the lowest since 2007 and continuing to fall sharply, growth apparently picking up, inflation low?

    I struggle in my adult lifetime to recall a time when there was such a mismatch between an economy doing remarkably well and a government that gives chaos a bad name. Normally governments fall into chaos because they are struggling to cope with adverse economic events.

    Here, of course, it is Brexit. May's determination to avoid making decisions for the last 2 years has come home to roost. Will she find a way through to a vaguely credible if suboptimal deal? Who knows? It is a toss of a coin, it really is. We can only hope.

    The economy is not doing *that* well. Wages growth is only marginally above inflation, and this comes after an awful period of declining real incomes. Home ownership has declined. The economy still has its structural imbalances. We import too much and export too little. We have sold off so many of our national assets that we now remit more in dividends abroad then we receive from our foreign investments.

    Unemployment is low, but with poor wages and high living costs we have high levels of in-work poverty.

    The economy could certainly be doing a lot worse, but let's not fool ourselves that it's doing all that well.
    Sure, there is still work to do, especially on the trade balance which in turn requires us to reduce our excessive consumption and to invest more, but when I was younger there was something called the Misery index which involved adding the unemployment rate to the inflation rate. It was reported regularly on the news. I doubt it has ever been as low as it is right now. Lower unemployment in the mid 1970s was combined with substantial inflation.

    I did note that last year our government had a surplus on current spending. It spent roughly £41bn on capital investment but only ran a £39.7bn deficit. It is astonishing how comparatively painless the reduction in the deficit has been.
    Well The deficit has been reduced a lot more slowly than Osborne originally intended. Less than half the speed. I think that it has been a lot more painful for some people than others. Benefits are still frozen. Local government has taken the brunt of the pain as the New York Times recently reported. Cuts in social care may have lead to a reduction in life expectancy.

    I'd say that you could argue the mismatch is the other way around. The government is in some ways lucky to have the crisis of Brexit to distract attention from everything else that is going wrong.
  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:


    There aren't the votes for "Singapore-on-Sea". The 2017 GE should have showm that. Even if this current shower could outline and legislate for it, they'd be swimming against the tide of public opinion. The Leave voters of Stoke and Sunderland weren't stampeding to the polls for tax and spending cuts, removal of employment rights and de-regulation.
    Would be electoral suicide.

    Not citing it because of personal preference or because I thought it would sell electorally, merely as one possible example - and I picked that one because I think it's the closest the current cabinet have got to endorsing an alternative, when Hammond gave a "warning" to the EU that the UK would feel compelled to respond to a no-deal scenario by focusing on competitiveness.

    To be fair, it isn't voters in Sunderland that the Tories will be worried of. But my point was precisely that even if Hammond started arguing that now is the time to start aping Singapore (I'm not sure that he would, he didn't seem to have much conviction in his threat - or any hint of follow-up in terms of contingency preparations) then I don't know whether he'd even be able to sell it to the current cabinet, let alone the good denizens of Sunderland, and I would rate it as extremely unlikely he could sway his own backbenchers. On the other hand, I'm not sure I can see any other model that the whole Tory party would swing behind either.

    If Labour took office in an election after no-deal, it is not beyond belief that they will do so on the back of selling a "big picture" of how they are going to transform Britain to make its new situation work out. Again, not saying the plan would actually work and am sure plenty of PBers would see any Corbynite plan as incredibly destructive, but my point is simply that one can imagine Labour coming up with an alternative vision, largely uniting around it, and actually selling it. Maybe even making an honest attempt to implement it. It's rather harder to imagine the Tory party in its current state accomplishing any of those things.
    Yes hard Brexit, out of the single market and socialism. That would be Britain under Corbyn and McDonnell
    But might it not be possible that people might prefer competent Socialism over incompetent rabid Toryism? Personally, I prefer neither, but politics these days do seem to be expressed as a binary choice.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    They resigned because they were being ignored (in fact deliberately lied to) by Remainers. They are ready and waiting to take over, which I assume they will in due course.

    They had the opportunity to take over. They ran away.

    “I must tell you, my friends, you who have waited faithfully for the punchline of this speech, that having consulted colleagues and in view of the circumstances in parliament, I have concluded that person cannot be me,” Johnson said at the close of his speech at a London luxury hotel.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    edited July 2018
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Yeah, but apart from all that aren't things going well? Unemployment the lowest since 1975, public borrowing the lowest since 2007 and continuing to fall sharply, growth apparently picking up, inflation low?

    I struggle in my adult lifetime to recall a time when there was such a mismatch between an economy doing remarkably well and a government that gives chaos a bad name. Normally governments fall into chaos because they are struggling to cope with adverse economic events.

    Here, of course, it is Brexit. May's determination to avoid making decisions for the last 2 years has come home to roost. Will she find a way through to a vaguely credible if suboptimal deal? Who knows? It is a toss of a coin, it really is. We can only hope.

    The last years of the Major government are the parallel. The economy doing well, but on a background of cachectic public services, and a government that spends all its time banging on about internal conflicts over Europe.

    Blair and Jezza are different people, and I cannot see Jezza getting a 197 majority, but that is the way the wind is blowing. The economy will not save a Tory party that says "F*** Business".
    Actually in my view Corbyn may well be another Kinnock who will allow the Tories a historic 4th term they may well have lost against any other leader because he thinks the British people will back him on his second attempt despite losing first time.

    In which case is Chuka Umunna Tony Blair?
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,003

    Scott_P said:

    Why not let the people who actually voted Leave take over?

    They all ran away
    They resigned because they were being ignored (in fact deliberately lied to) by Remainers. They are ready and waiting to take over, which I assume they will in due course.
    Sine it is a secret ballot, we don't *know* how they voted.

    Boris probably put a cross in the wrong box.
    JRM probably got his nanny to do it.
    David Davis probably resigned from the polling booth in a huff.
    Fox probably shot the paper with crosses.

    :)
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Yeah, but apart from all that aren't things going well? Unemployment the lowest since 1975, public borrowing the lowest since 2007 and continuing to fall sharply, growth apparently picking up, inflation low?

    I struggle in my adult lifetime to recall a time when there was such a mismatch between an economy doing remarkably well and a government that gives chaos a bad name. Normally governments fall into chaos because they are struggling to cope with adverse economic events.

    Here, of course, it is Brexit. May's determination to avoid making decisions for the last 2 years has come home to roost. Will she find a way through to a vaguely credible if suboptimal deal? Who knows? It is a toss of a coin, it really is. We can only hope.

    The last years of the Major government are the parallel. The economy doing well, but on a background of cachectic public services, and a government that spends all its time banging on about internal conflicts over Europe.

    Blair and Jezza are different people, and I cannot see Jezza getting a 197 majority, but that is the way the wind is blowing. The economy will not save a Tory party that says "F*** Business".
    Yes, that was a bad time with very high unemployment and a government struggling to reduce it except by cheating or statistical sleights of hand. But Major had panicked about a £40bn deficit that arose from the 1991 recession (ah, the naive innocence of those days) and starved the public sector of spending to a completely excessive level. Now we celebrate the deficit coming down to £40bn. And he also did not have anyone to steer his government for him, certainly after he fell out with Norman Lamont.
This discussion has been closed.