A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
The other likely possibility is Transition to be agreed as per last December, but with no agreed final destination. This kicks the can down the road for 21 extra monthe of gripping PB discussions.
I call this Limbo Brexit, and it could be agreed by EEA Leavers, and No Dealers as it keeps both options open, but with time for the latter to finally pull their finger out over preparations.
Been searching for comments on Apple becoming a trillion dollar company. I guess this event may not be seen as political but maybe it should. The world is changing and our government doesn't really seem to have a plan.
The average age of my staff is dropping fast as we adopt more technology at my company. I am not sure we realise how dependent we are on the youth of the country. Yet we virtually ignore them politically
I made a couple but personally I found Amazon UK's derisory tax bill more inflammatory and political. The power of the FAAMGs is indeed a concern for all governments. They make Standard Oil in its pomp look like a corner shop.
Corporation tax is paid on profits, and Amazon is very good at profit minimisation.
Been searching for comments on Apple becoming a trillion dollar company. I guess this event may not be seen as political but maybe it should. The world is changing and our government doesn't really seem to have a plan.
The average age of my staff is dropping fast as we adopt more technology at my company. I am not sure we realise how dependent we are on the youth of the country. Yet we virtually ignore them politically
I made a couple but personally I found Amazon UK's derisory tax bill more inflammatory and political. The power of the FAAMGs is indeed a concern for all governments. They make Standard Oil in its pomp look like a corner shop.
Whilst a company can legally claim it has one corporate structure to country A and a different structure to company B these kind of shenanigans will continue.
Not even country-by-country reporting can stop this, only global harmonisation/info sharing on declared corporate structures.
£8bn of UK sales being booked in Luxemburg seems to me an obvious place to start. Profits are being diverted from where they are generated to our very considerable cost. Amazon's bill should have been 100x what it was.
New law - for every ten migrant workers a business employs it has to fund a new house being built.
For multinationals reduce to every five workers, for workers being paid under average earnings reduce to every two workers.
What's that got to do with profits being booked overseas?
.......the consequences of Brexit have compromised the entire EMA, which will affect all remaining member states. Not only will this make it more complicated for European life science companies to reach regulatory approval for their treatments, it also mitigates the EU’s active role in addressing global public health issues.
Been searching for comments on Apple becoming a trillion dollar company. I guess this event may not be seen as political but maybe it should. The world is changing and our government doesn't really seem to have a plan.
The average age of my staff is dropping fast as we adopt more technology at my company. I am not sure we realise how dependent we are on the youth of the country. Yet we virtually ignore them politically
I made a couple but personally I found Amazon UK's derisory tax bill more inflammatory and political. The power of the FAAMGs is indeed a concern for all governments. They make Standard Oil in its pomp look like a corner shop.
Whilst a company can legally claim it has one corporate structure to country A and a different structure to company B these kind of shenanigans will continue.
Not even country-by-country reporting can stop this, only global harmonisation/info sharing on declared corporate structures.
£8bn of UK sales being booked in Luxemburg seems to me an obvious place to start. Profits are being diverted from where they are generated to our very considerable cost. Amazon's bill should have been 100x what it was.
New law - for every ten migrant workers a business employs it has to fund a new house being built.
For multinationals reduce to every five workers, for workers being paid under average earnings reduce to every two workers.
What's that got to do with profits being booked overseas?
Its a way of getting businesses which are dependent upon cheap migrant labour to contribute towards the housing and public services costs consequent to it.
It would be especially useful for those companies which have operations in this country but avoid paying corporation tax here by booking their profits in low tax countries.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
For the sake of argument assume your analysis is correct. Why would May not throw in a game changer before that point?
Such as?
A second referendum. If you think she's a goner if the Withdrawal Agreement goes to parliament, that's the best way to preempt it.
What possible basis would she have for proposing one? ‘Please lets have a referendum on my crap deal because it is so bad that my own party won’t support it, but Olly says that it would be a good idea if we just Remained?’ If she tried a stunt like that I can imagine the Leavers no-confidencing their own Government. These people have spent their whole political lives fighting to leave the EU.
There is not going to be another referendum. It doesn’t solve anything and there would not be time. The only way to heal the EU division in the UK is to let the Leavers have their way and see if it works. That is what the people voted for. If it doesn’t work, you can always campaign to rejoin.
I think the reason that Remainers are terrified of No Deal is not because they really think it will damage the UK. They are worried that if it doesn’t, they will be proven totally wrong about the benefits of membership and the UK will never, ever rejoin.
... so Newton has just gone down in history as genius and massive pain in the arse.
Which, of course, is exactly what he was.
Genuises are often very, very driven people and I suspect that a high proportion of them are/were autistic in some way (and I say that as someone with a daughter who has Aspergers)
He may have been a massive PITA but must be a contender for the (subjective) title of greatest ever scientist?
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
Think through what happens if Parliament votes down May's deal in say January, so that no deal is what going to happen unless ...
... the Government resigns. (Not just May but the Government). A potential government will be put together PDQ to avert a no deal, possibly lead by Grieve. First task, get an extension of A50. EU will agree. They don't want a no deal either. Second task - a referendum on no deal, May's deal or remain. Third task - execute the result of the referendum. Fourth task - resign for a GE. This won't happen though. May's deal will be passed and the can kicked down the road.
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
The other likely possibility is Transition to be agreed as per last December, but with no agreed final destination. This kicks the can down the road for 21 extra monthe of gripping PB discussions.
I call this Limbo Brexit, and it could be agreed by EEA Leavers, and No Dealers as it keeps both options open, but with time for the latter to finally pull their finger out over preparations.
No, doesn’t work for Leavers at all. This involves accepting the NI Backstop which makes any FTA impossible as well as paying 40bn for nothing. There is no way the EU will ever agree an FTA when they have the money and the backstop. The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
Think through what happens if Parliament votes down May's deal in say January, so that no deal is what going to happen unless ...
... the Government resigns. (Not just May but the Government). A potential government will be put together PDQ to avert a no deal, possibly lead by Grieve. First task, get an extension of A50. EU will agree. They don't want a no deal either. Second task - a referendum on no deal, May's deal or remain. Third task - execute the result of the referendum. Fourth task - resign for a GE. This won't happen though. May's deal will be passed and the can kicked down the road.
I don’t see this happening at all. All that will happen is that May will resign and the Tories will hold a lightning leadership election and a Leaver will replace her. What you are proposing would result in the utter destruction of the Conservative party. Nobody would let that happen. They will just press on with No Deal and make the best of it.
May's deal will be passed and the can kicked down the road.
If you think of the real world choices, if we kick the can and head for limbo Brexit, it will provide the perfect context for an orderly dissolution of the UK.
Been searching for comments on Apple becoming a trillion dollar company. I guess this event may not be seen as political but maybe it should. The world is changing and our government doesn't really seem to have a plan.
The average age of my staff is dropping fast as we adopt more technology at my company. I am not sure we realise how dependent we are on the youth of the country. Yet we virtually ignore them politically
I made a couple but personally I found Amazon UK's derisory tax bill more inflammatory and political. The power of the FAAMGs is indeed a concern for all governments. They make Standard Oil in its pomp look like a corner shop.
Corporation tax is paid on profits, and Amazon is very good at profit minimisation.
Yes. Amazon keeps investing in new businesses, the cost of which it can offset against the profits in existing businesses.
For example
1. Selling Kindles at a loss and then earning income from selling electronic books in future years
2. Using the profits of its online sales site to finance expansion into providing cloud services.
By investing this way, Amazon is doing what politicians are constantly encouraging businesses to do and favour the long term over the short term.
The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
Most of the public have had their cognitive faculties rotted by SSRIs, reality TV and refined sugar. They neither know nor care to find out about trade deals, backstops and all the rest of the bollocks. As long there is a perception that FoM is halted that will be enough Brexit for the great unsoaped.
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
The other likely possibility is Transition to be agreed as per last December, but with no agreed final destination. This kicks the can down the road for 21 extra monthe of gripping PB discussions.
I call this Limbo Brexit, and it could be agreed by EEA Leavers, and No Dealers as it keeps both options open, but with time for the latter to finally pull their finger out over preparations.
No, doesn’t work for Leavers at all. This involves accepting the NI Backstop which makes any FTA impossible as well as paying 40bn for nothing. There is no way the EU will ever agree an FTA when they have the money and the backstop. The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
It doesn't matter that it doesn't work for hard Leavers. They just won't get their own way. Period. The public are heterogeneous not some Marxist concept.
1) Given it is the Sunday Sport, is this some kind of euphemism, and if so for what?
2) I would not have thought a gentleman of taste, intelligence and wit - such as yourself - would read the Sunday Sport. How the f*** did you come across it?
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
The other likely possibility is Transition to be agreed as per last December, but with no agreed final destination. This kicks the can down the road for 21 extra monthe of gripping PB discussions.
I call this Limbo Brexit, and it could be agreed by EEA Leavers, and No Dealers as it keeps both options open, but with time for the latter to finally pull their finger out over preparations.
No, doesn’t work for Leavers at all. This involves accepting the NI Backstop which makes any FTA impossible as well as paying 40bn for nothing. There is no way the EU will ever agree an FTA when they have the money and the backstop. The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
It doesn't matter that it doesn't work for hard Leavers. They just won't get their own way. Period. The public are heterogeneous not some Marxist concept.
The public hate being pushed around by the EU and will go crazy if May pays over a fortune for nothing. The Leavers will just vote it down. You think Corbyn is going to vote for that?
1) Given it is the Sunday Sport, is this some kind of euphemism, and if so for what?
2) I would not have thought a gentleman of taste, intelligence and wit - such as yourself - would read the Sunday Sport. How the f*** did you come across it?
The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
Most of the public have had their cognitive faculties rotted by SSRIs, reality TV and refined sugar. They neither know nor care to find out about trade deals, backstops and all the rest of the bollocks. As long there is a perception that FoM is halted that will be enough Brexit for the great unsoaped.
Oh, the people are stupid meme again. Have you given any thought to why you lost the referendum?
Been searching for comments on Apple becoming a trillion dollar company. I guess this event may not be seen as political but maybe it should. The world is changing and our government doesn't really seem to have a plan.
The average age of my staff is dropping fast as we adopt more technology at my company. I am not sure we realise how dependent we are on the youth of the country. Yet we virtually ignore them politically
I made a couple but personally I found Amazon UK's derisory tax bill more inflammatory and political. The power of the FAAMGs is indeed a concern for all governments. They make Standard Oil in its pomp look like a corner shop.
Whilst a company can legally claim it has one corporate structure to country A and a different structure to company B these kind of shenanigans will continue.
Not even country-by-country reporting can stop this, only global harmonisation/info sharing on declared corporate structures.
£8bn of UK sales being booked in Luxemburg seems to me an obvious place to start. Profits are being diverted from where they are generated to our very considerable cost. Amazon's bill should have been 100x what it was.
New law - for every ten migrant workers a business employs it has to fund a new house being built.
For multinationals reduce to every five workers, for workers being paid under average earnings reduce to every two workers.
What's that got to do with profits being booked overseas?
Its a way of getting businesses which are dependent upon cheap migrant labour to contribute towards the housing and public services costs consequent to it.
It would be especially useful for those companies which have operations in this country but avoid paying corporation tax here by booking their profits in low tax countries.
What evidence do you have that Amazon is dependant on cheap migrant labour? Multiple sources which are more than just anecdote please.
The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
Most of the public have had their cognitive faculties rotted by SSRIs, reality TV and refined sugar. They neither know nor care to find out about trade deals, backstops and all the rest of the bollocks. As long there is a perception that FoM is halted that will be enough Brexit for the great unsoaped.
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
The other likely possibility is Transition to be agreed as per last December, but with no agreed final destination. This kicks the can down the road for 21 extra monthe of gripping PB discussions.
I call this Limbo Brexit, and it could be agreed by EEA Leavers, and No Dealers as it keeps both options open, but with time for the latter to finally pull their finger out over preparations.
No, doesn’t work for Leavers at all. This involves accepting the NI Backstop which makes any FTA impossible as well as paying 40bn for nothing. There is no way the EU will ever agree an FTA when they have the money and the backstop. The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
The public are perhaps not as engaged as you. Despite your distance.
... so Newton has just gone down in history as genius and massive pain in the arse.
Which, of course, is exactly what he was.
Genuises are often very, very driven people and I suspect that a high proportion of them are/were autistic in some way (and I say that as someone with a daughter who has Aspergers)
He may have been a massive PITA but must be a contender for the (subjective) title of greatest ever scientist?
Boris resembles Gordon Brown in his ambition for number 10. He also has that slight lack of the killer instinct. Expects and demands and does everything short of actually getting it.
No, May or Osborne more resemble Brown on that front.
Boris has charisma, Brown did not
I really think you put far too much stock in the fact he has charisma. Yes, he does. It isn't the be all and end all.
I think we also need to look at why he decided against standing last time. Was it simply that he thought he’d be beaten by Gove, or was there something else that might have come out in the campaign to scupper his chances? We all know there’s plenty of skeletons in his closet, and the UK isn’t Italy or the US when it comes to ignoring these things when it suits.
Also the same question about Chuka Umunna, who decided not to stand for the Lab leadership a week after he’d announced he was standing in 2015. (He’s since got married).
'Scandals' don't matter if you have charisma. And for those who say we are more prudish than the US or Italy who elected Bill Clinton, Trump and Berlusconi I just point you to the late Alan Clark who despite what he called 'a cupboard full of skeletons' was elected to Parliament multiple times.
I doubt Boris or Umunna should worry, indeed I would not be surprised if they are our next two PMs
Only if Umunna is still a member of the Labour Party. Many expect the usual suspects to flounce out at the LP autumn conference and form an SDP type party. Problem for them is that too many local party members, activists and supporters in the relevant constituencies are ready and waiting, considering it as a much easier solution to the deselection process. Meanwhile, the CCP regard themselves as more popular in their constituencies than they actually are.
As I have said before if Corbyn loses the next general election and is replaced by a Corbynista Umunna will almost certainly do a Macron and start a new centrist party, he has already been talking to the likes of Soubry and the LDs about exactly that.
Even if Corbyn wins he may do the same eventually if Corbyn becomes unpopular, rember Macron only founded En Marche as Hollande looked like losing to Les Republicains or even falling behind Le Pen and Front National on the Socialist Party ticket
1) Given it is the Sunday Sport, is this some kind of euphemism, and if so for what?
2) I would not have thought a gentleman of taste, intelligence and wit - such as yourself - would read the Sunday Sport. How the f*** did you come across it?
I am Freddie Stars nutritionist!!
Are you saying there is not even a gerbil of truth in this story?
(Edit - I suppose if it were true, which BTW seems unlikely, the most embarrassing thing for Corbyn would be how upper-class it all sounds.)
1) Given it is the Sunday Sport, is this some kind of euphemism, and if so for what?
2) I would not have thought a gentleman of taste, intelligence and wit - such as yourself - would read the Sunday Sport. How the f*** did you come across it?
I am Freddie Stars nutritionist!!
Are you saying there is not even a gerbil of truth in this story?
(Edit - I suppose if it were true, which BTW seems unlikely, the most embarrassing thing for Corbyn would be how upper-class it all sounds.)
In the last bit of the article the sister says she never had a rabbit!!
Was it upper class to get a pogo stick for Christmas!!
Boris last attempt at the leadership ended in farce and exposed the fragility of his ego... he didn’t even make the starting line. However, soundings over the weekend confirm what @HYUFD is saying... activists are being told to shut up whilst May gets it “over the line” on March 29th after which it’s game on to campaign for what should happen during the transition period, including g one assumes a change of leader
Yes, that is likely (assuming a deal to get over the line can be had, which seems doubtful, since future contenders like Boris will probably need to say the deal is crap and how can they then back it), and Boris has been maneuvering himself for it. But he has the same problems as before, only more so. He does still have his positives. But if the time wasn't right last time for him, for all manner of reasons, there's certainly no guarantee the time will be right for him next time either.
What is there to get over the line ? Barnier just jumped up and down on the torn up shreds of the Chequers offer, and Macron just told her to piss off when she tried to go over Barnier's head. The Chequers offer is dead, and in September Tory MPs are going to come back from their constituencies having had a month of ear bashing from their constituency associations and from mailbags and surgeries to tell her there isn't the faintest stomach for it in the voluntary party or much of the electorate.
Actually Barnier said he could work with the Chequers Deal, the only thing he and the EU are holding put for is more regulatory alignment on services to match the regulatory alignment May has already proposed on goods
Plus free movement and the Customs Union.
No that was not a requirement. The regulatory alignment proposed for goods largely resolves the Customs Union issue and Barnier has had no issues with the mobility framework replacing free movement given we will still technically be leaving the single market but he does want more regulatory alignment on services before agreeing the transition period
Boris last attempt at the leadership ended in farce and exposed the fragility of his ego... he didn’t even make the starting line. However, soundings over the weekend confirm what @HYUFD is saying... activists are being told to shut up whilst May gets it “over the line” on March 29th after which it’s game on to campaign for what should happen during the transition period, including g one assumes a change of leader
Yes, that is likely (assuming a deal to get over the line can be had, which seems doubtful, since future contenders like Boris will probably need to say the deal is crap and how can they then back it), and Boris has been maneuvering himself for it. But he has the same problems as before, only more so. He does still have his positives. But if the time wasn't right last time for him, for all manner of reasons, there's certainly no guarantee the time will be right for him next time either.
What is there to get over the line ? Barnier just jumped up and down on the torn up shreds of the Chequers offer, and Macron just told her to piss off when she tried to go over Barnier's head. The Chequers offer is dead, and in September Tory MPs are going to come back from their constituencies having had a month of ear bashing from their constituency associations and from mailbags and surgeries to tell her there isn't the faintest stomach for it in the voluntary party or much of the electorate.
Actually Barnier said he could work with the Chequers Deal, the only thing he and the EU are holding put for is more regulatory alignment on services to match the regulatory alignment May has already proposed on goods
Plus free movement and the Customs Union.
No that was not a requirement. The regulatory alignment proposed for goods largely resolves the Customs Union issue and Barnier has had no issues with the mobility framework replacing free movement given we will still technically be leaving the single market but he does want more regulatory alignment on services before agreeing the transition period
I don’t think either of these are correct. The EU has pretty much rejected the customs partnership. I expect they will tell May that she can have Chequers only with a full CU - which means the pretence of an independent trade policy is dead. They will want a form of FOM although disguised at a change.
Regulatory alignment on services plus a CU is no different than EEA plus CU. No way May can sell that to her party.
1) Given it is the Sunday Sport, is this some kind of euphemism, and if so for what?
2) I would not have thought a gentleman of taste, intelligence and wit - such as yourself - would read the Sunday Sport. How the f*** did you come across it?
I am Freddie Stars nutritionist!!
Are you saying there is not even a gerbil of truth in this story?
(Edit - I suppose if it were true, which BTW seems unlikely, the most embarrassing thing for Corbyn would be how upper-class it all sounds.)
Corbyn is upper middle class, he grew up in a Shropshire manor house and went to prep school and grammar school. No working class Bevan or Kinnock or Prescott is he
1) Given it is the Sunday Sport, is this some kind of euphemism, and if so for what?
2) I would not have thought a gentleman of taste, intelligence and wit - such as yourself - would read the Sunday Sport. How the f*** did you come across it?
I am Freddie Stars nutritionist!!
Are you saying there is not even a gerbil of truth in this story?
(Edit - I suppose if it were true, which BTW seems unlikely, the most embarrassing thing for Corbyn would be how upper-class it all sounds.)
In the last bit of the article the sister says she never had a rabbit!!
Was it upper class to get a pogo stick for Christmas!!
Whilst a company can legally claim it has one corporate structure to country A and a different structure to company B these kind of shenanigans will continue.
Not even country-by-country reporting can stop this, only global harmonisation/info sharing on declared corporate structures.
£8bn of UK sales being booked in Luxemburg seems to me an obvious place to start. Profits are being diverted from where they are generated to our very considerable cost. Amazon's bill should have been 100x what it was.
New law - for every ten migrant workers a business employs it has to fund a new house being built.
For multinationals reduce to every five workers, for workers being paid under average earnings reduce to every two workers.
What's that got to do with profits being booked overseas?
Its a way of getting businesses which are dependent upon cheap migrant labour to contribute towards the housing and public services costs consequent to it.
It would be especially useful for those companies which have operations in this country but avoid paying corporation tax here by booking their profits in low tax countries.
What evidence do you have that Amazon is dependant on cheap migrant labour? Multiple sources which are more than just anecdote please.
' The recruitment agencies that supplied eastern Europeans to Amazon warned their workers that, if they made a fuss about their conditions, there was a reserve army of their fellow countrymen ready to take their place. Bloodworth and his colleagues made about £250 a week. The average weekly wage in Romania was a little over £100. One migrant told Bloodworth he worked like an animal and was a nobody in the UK. But in Romania he would be a nobody without enough to eat. '
The public will be livid if she pays that sort of money and does not get a trade deal.
Most of the public have had their cognitive faculties rotted by SSRIs, reality TV and refined sugar. They neither know nor care to find out about trade deals, backstops and all the rest of the bollocks. As long there is a perception that FoM is halted that will be enough Brexit for the great unsoaped.
Maybe. That's the thinking that fudged solutions will always work, because they usually do, but if it is poorly packaged fudge people can, reasonably or not, reject it.
Boris last attempt at the leadership ended in farce and exposed the fragility of his ego... he didn’t even make the starting line. However, soundings over the weekend confirm what @HYUFD is saying... activists are being told to shut up whilst May gets it “over the line” on March 29th after which it’s game on to campaign for what should happen during the transition period, including g one assumes a change of leader
Yes, that is likely (assuming a deal to get over the line can be had, which seems doubtful, since future contenders like Boris will probably need to say the deal is crap and how can they then back it), and Boris has been maneuvering himself for it. But he has the same problems as before, only more so. He does still have his positives. But if the time wasn't right last time for him, for all manner of reasons, there's certainly no guarantee the time will be right for him next time either.
What is there to get over the line ? Barnier just jumped up and down on the torn up shreds of the .
Actually Barnier said he could work with the Chequers Deal, the only thing he and the EU are holding put for is more regulatory alignment on services to match the regulatory alignment May has already proposed on goods
Plus free movement and the Customs Union.
No that was not a requirement. The regulatory alignment proposed for goods largely resolves the Customs Union issue and Barnier has had no issues with the mobility framework replacing free movement given we will still technically be leaving the single market but he does want more regulatory alignment on services before agreeing the transition period
I don’t think either of these are correct. The EU has pretty much rejected the customs partnership. I expect they will tell May that she can have Chequers only with a full CU - which means the pretence of an independent trade policy is dead. They will want a form of FOM although disguised at a change.
Regulatory alignment on services plus a CU is no different than EEA plus CU. No way May can sell that to her party.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement. The ERG and Boris and Davis etc will vote against it as will Corbyn Labour but May might get it through with the bulk of Tory votes plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels
Boris last attempt at the leadership ended in farce and exposed the fragility of his ego... he didn’t even make the starting line. However, soundings over the weekend confirm what @HYUFD is saying... activists are being told to shut up whilst May gets it “over the line” on March 29th after which it’s game on to campaign for what should happen during the transition period, including g one assumes a change of leader
But he has the same problems as before, only more so. He does still have his positives. But if the time wasn't right last time for him, for all manner of reasons, there's certainly no guarantee the time will be right for him next time either.
What is there to get over the line ? Barnier just jumped up and down on the torn up shreds of the .
Actually Barnier said he could work with the Chequers Deal, the only thing he and the EU are holding put for is more regulatory alignment on services to match the regulatory alignment May has already proposed on goods
Plus free movement and the Customs Union.
No that was not a requirement. The regulatory alignment proposed for goods largely resolves the Customs Union issue and Barnier has had no issues with the mobility framework replacing free movement given we will still technically be leaving the single market but he does want more regulatory alignment on services before agreeing the transition period
I don’t think either of these are correct. The EU has pretty much rejected the customs partnership. I expect they will tell May that she can have Chequers only with a full CU - which means the pretence of an independent trade policy is dead. They will want a form of FOM although disguised at a change.
Regulatory alignment on services plus a CU is no different than EEA plus CU. No way May can sell that to her party.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement. The ERG and Boris and Davis etc will vote against it as will Corbyn Labour but May might get it through with the bulk of Tory votes plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels
"plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels" Sounds optimistic.
Whilst a company can legally claim it has one corporate structure to country A and a different structure to company B these kind of shenanigans will continue.
Not even country-by-country reporting can stop this, only global harmonisation/info sharing on declared corporate structures.
£8bn of UK sales being booked in Luxemburg seems to me an obvious place to start. Profits are being diverted from where they are generated to our very considerable cost. Amazon's bill should have been 100x what it was.
New law - for every ten migrant workers a business employs it has to fund a new house being built.
For multinationals reduce to every five workers, for workers being paid under average earnings reduce to every two workers.
What's that got to do with profits being booked overseas?
Its a way of getting businesses which are dependent upon cheap migrant labour to contribute towards the housing and public services costs consequent to it.
It would be especially useful for those companies which have operations in this country but avoid paying corporation tax here by booking their profits in low tax countries.
What evidence do you have that Amazon is dependant on cheap migrant labour? Multiple sources which are more than just anecdote please.
' The recruitment agencies that supplied eastern Europeans to Amazon warned their workers that, if they made a fuss about their conditions, there was a reserve army of their fellow countrymen ready to take their place. Bloodworth and his colleagues made about £250 a week. The average weekly wage in Romania was a little over £100. One migrant told Bloodworth he worked like an animal and was a nobody in the UK. But in Romania he would be a nobody without enough to eat. '
Do you think that Amazon DON'T make use of cheap migrant labour ???
Of couse they do, but hardly unique in that.
I don't think your migrant taxaspossible. Not many work for long at Amazon, there is a lot ofchurn to more stable and renumerative jobs, often after a few months.
What Amazon needs is unionisation to stop exploitative practices.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
Think through what happens if Parliament votes down May's deal in say January, so that no deal is what going to happen unless ...
... the Government resigns. (Not just May but the Government). A potential government will be put together PDQ to avert a no deal, possibly lead by Grieve. First task, get an extension of A50. EU will agree. They don't want a no deal either. Second task - a referendum on no deal, May's deal or remain. Third task - execute the result of the referendum. Fourth task - resign for a GE. This won't happen though. May's deal will be passed and the can kicked down the road.
You think Labour MPs would serve under Grieve as PM? Hilarious. The Tory rebels will have a simple choice - support a hard Brexit Tory government or put Corbyn in.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
Boris last attempt at the leadership ended in farce and exposed the fragility of his ego... he didn’t even make the starting line. However, soundings over the weekend confirm what @HYUFD is saying... activists are being told to shut up whilst May gets it “over the line” on March 29th after which it’s game on to campaign for what should happen during the transition period, including g one assumes a change of leader
But he has the same problems as before, only more so. He does still have his positives. But if the time wasn't right last time for him, for all manner of reasons, there's certainly no guarantee the time will be right for him next time either.
What is there to get over the line ? Barnier just jumped up and down on the torn up shreds of the .
Actually Barnier said he could work with the Chequers Deal, the only thing he and the EU are holding put for is more regulatory alignment on services to match the regulatory alignment May has already proposed on goods
Plus free movement and the Customs Union.
No that was not a requirement. The regulatory alignment proposed ansition period
I don’t think either of these are correct. The EU has pretty much rejected the customs partnership. I expect they will tell May that she can have Chequers only with a full CU - which means the pretence of an independent trade policy is dead. They will want a form of FOM although disguised at a change.
Regulatory alignment on services plus a CU is no different than EEA plus CU. No way May can sell that to her party.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement. The ERG and Boris and Davis etc will vote against it as will Corbyn Labour but May might get it through with the bulk of Tory votes plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels
"plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels" Sounds optimistic.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
For the sake of argument assume your analysis is correct. Why would May not throw in a game changer before that point?
Such as?
A second referendum. If you think she's a goner if the Withdrawal Agreement goes to parliament, that's the best way to preempt it.
What possible basis would she have for proposing one? ‘Please lets have a referendum on my crap deal because it is so bad that my own party won’t support it, but Olly says that it would be a good idea if we just Remained?’ If she tried a stunt like that I can imagine the Leavers no-confidencing their own Government. These people have spent their whole political lives fighting to leave the EU.
There is not going to be another referendum. It doesn’t solve anything and there would not be time. The only way to heal the EU division in the UK is to let the Leavers have their way and see if it works. That is what the people voted for. If it doesn’t work, you can always campaign to rejoin.
I think the reason that Remainers are terrified of No Deal is not because they really think it will damage the UK. They are worried that if it doesn’t, they will be proven totally wrong about the benefits of membership and the UK will never, ever rejoin.
The Government don't have a plan that would work, there are too many contradictions. The ONLY way they can resolve it is to have a 'People's Vote' on the possible proposals. Then the people really will have spoken. God help us if the choose 'Crash out to WTO'.
Been searching for comments on Apple becoming a trillion dollar company. I guess this event may not be seen as political but maybe it should. The world is changing and our government doesn't really seem to have a plan.
The average age of my staff is dropping fast as we adopt more technology at my company. I am not sure we realise how dependent we are on the youth of the country. Yet we virtually ignore them politically
I made a couple but personally I found Amazon UK's derisory tax bill more inflammatory and political. The power of the FAAMGs is indeed a concern for all governments. They make Standard Oil in its pomp look like a corner shop.
Can anyone recommend a good book about Standard Oil?
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
That is a rejection of the partnership HYUFD....
The customs partnership was basically the Customs Union in all but name bar the levy collection and that is what we will end up with minus the levy collection which will stay with the EU
New law - for every ten migrant workers a business employs it has to fund a new house being built.
For multinationals reduce to every five workers, for workers being paid under average earnings reduce to every two workers.
What's that got to do with profits being booked overseas?
Its a way of getting businesses which are dependent upon cheap migrant labour to contribute towards the housing and public services costs consequent to it.
It would be especially useful for those companies which have operations in this country but avoid paying corporation tax here by booking their profits in low tax countries.
What evidence do you have that Amazon is dependant on cheap migrant labour? Multiple sources which are more than just anecdote please.
' The recruitment agencies that supplied eastern Europeans to Amazon warned their workers that, if they made a fuss about their conditions, there was a reserve army of their fellow countrymen ready to take their place. Bloodworth and his colleagues made about £250 a week. The average weekly wage in Romania was a little over £100. One migrant told Bloodworth he worked like an animal and was a nobody in the UK. But in Romania he would be a nobody without enough to eat. '
Do you think that Amazon DON'T make use of cheap migrant labour ???
Of couse they do, but hardly unique in that.
I don't think your migrant taxaspossible. Not many work for long at Amazon, there is a lot ofchurn to more stable and renumerative jobs, often after a few months.
What Amazon needs is unionisation to stop exploitative practices.
Certainly Amazon are not alone - Sports Direct are notorious
but what we have are big businesses making use of cheap migrant labour without contributing to the housing and social costs which result.
Many of these giant warehouses are built on the actual sites of former coal mines.
I've mentioned this before but a century ago some of my ancestors moved to Yorkshire to work in similar mines and mining companies didn't only provide a place of work but also contributed to new housing and in the provision of the required increase in public services.
I don't see the likes of Amazon offering that now - instead its the local communities which have to bear the extra housing and public services responsibilities.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
For the sake of argument assume your analysis is correct. Why would May not throw in a game changer before that point?
Such as?
A second referendum. If you think she's a goner if the Withdrawal Agreement goes to parliament, that's the best way to preempt it.
What possible basis would she have for proposing one? ‘Please lets have a referendum on my crap deal because it is so bad that my own party won’t support it, but Olly says that it would be a good idea if we just Remained?’ If she tried a stunt like that I can imagine the Leavers no-confidencing their own Government. These people have spent their whole political lives fighting to leave the EU.
There is not going to be another referendum. It doesn’t solve anything and there would not be time. The only way to heal the EU division in the UK is to let the Leavers have their way and see if it works. That is what the people voted for. If it doesn’t work, you can always campaign to rejoin.
I think the reason that Remainers are terrified of No Deal is not because they really think it will damage the UK. They are worried that if it doesn’t, they will be proven totally wrong about the benefits of membership and the UK will never, ever rejoin.
The Government don't have a plan that would work, there are too many contradictions. The ONLY way they can resolve it is to have a 'People's Vote' on the possible proposals. Then the people really will have spoken. God help us if the choose 'Crash out to WTO'.
Agreed. Not sure how we get one since no dealers won't want remain as an option on the ballot, and continuity remainers won't want it NOT to be on the ballot, so I guess it depends on Labour? Who I do think will pivot to a vote despite various people saying otherwise - I don't think they will want to share in the responsibility of no deal by voting down the government's plans, but equally won't want to to share in responsibility for a crappy deal by voting for it.
A good explanation of the position of a hard Brexiteer. It makes sense from that point of view. But a hard Brexit (or a no deal) does not have the numbers in Parliament.
I suspect many Brexiteers are concerned that Brexit is losing momentum, that there is a growing chance of a second referendum and staying in, and that anything that gets us over the line on 29 March next year (even a BINO) is preferable to that. So they will support May. I think there are more of this type of Brexiteer among Tory MPs than the hard type.
It has been said before - no deal does not need any numbers in Parliament. No other deal has the numbers either, and no deal is what happens if nothing else takes its place. Parliament cannot negotiate nor approve a deal that does not exist. I simply don’t believe that Labour will suddenly decide to come together and support some kind of EEA dream deal - they have no reason to and Corbyn doesn’t want it.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
Think through what happens if Parliament votes down May's deal in say January, so that no deal is what going to happen unless ...
... the Government resigns. (Not just May but the Government). A potential government will be put together PDQ to avert a no deal, possibly lead by Grieve. First task, get an extension of A50. EU will agree. They don't want a no deal either. Second task - a referendum on no deal, May's deal or remain. Third task - execute the result of the referendum. Fourth task - resign for a GE. This won't happen though. May's deal will be passed and the can kicked down the road.
You think Labour MPs would serve under Grieve as PM? Hilarious. The Tory rebels will have a simple choice - support a hard Brexit Tory government or put Corbyn in.
If the deal collapses May will resign or lose a no confidence vote and the choice will of course be one of Boris, Mogg or Corbyn as PM of a No Deal Brexit UK. There will be no other alternative
Boris last attempt at the leadership ended in farce and exposed the fragility of his ego... he didn’t even make the starting line. However, soundings over the weekend confirm what @HYUFD is saying... activists are being told to shut up whilst May gets it “over the line” on March 29th after which it’s game on to campaign for what should happen during the transition period, including g one assumes a change of leader
But if the time wasn't right last time for him, for all manner of reasons, there's certainly no guarantee the time will be right for him next time either.
What is there to get over the line ? Barnier just jumped up and down on the torn up shreds of the .
Actually Barnier said he could work with the Chequers Deal, the only thing he and the EU are holding put for is more regulatory alignment on services to match the regulatory alignment May has already proposed on goods
Plus free movement and the Customs Union.
No that was not a requirement. The regulatory alignment proposed ansition period
I don’t think either of these are correct. The EU has pretty much rejected the customs partnership. I expect they will tell May that she can have Chequers only with a full CU - which means the pretence of an independent trade policy is dead. They will want a form of FOM although disguised at a change.
Regulatory alignment on services plus a CU is no different than EEA plus CU. No way May can sell that to her party.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement. The ERG and Boris and Davis etc will vote against it as will Corbyn Labour but May might get it through with the bulk of Tory votes plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels
"plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels" Sounds optimistic.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Would the LibDems see it as that? Surely a government defeat and new GE would suit them better?
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
That is a rejection of the partnership HYUFD....
The customs partnership was basically the Customs Union in all but name bar the levy collection and that is what we will end up with minus the levy collection which will stay with the EU
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Boris last attempt at the leadership ended in farce and exposed the fragility of his ego... he didn’t even make the starting line. However, soundings over the weekend confirm what @HYUFD is saying... activists are being told to shut up whilst May gets it “over the line” on March 29th after which it’s game on to campaign for what should happen during the transition period, including g one assumes a change of leader
But if the time wasn't right last time for him, for all manner of reasons, there's certainly no guarantee the time will be right for him next time either.
What is there to get over the line ? Barnier just jumped up and down on the torn up shreds of the .
Actually Barnier said he could work with the Chequers Deal, the only thing he and the EU are holding put for is more regulatory alignment on services to match the regulatory alignment May has already proposed on goods
Plus free movement and the Customs Union.
No that was not a requirement. The regulatory alignment proposed ansition period
I don’t think either of these are correct. The EU has pretty much rejected the customs
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement. The ERG and Boris and Davis etc will vote against it as will Corbyn Labour but May might get it through with the bulk of Tory votes plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels
"plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels" Sounds optimistic.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Would the LibDems see it as that? Surely a government defeat and new GE would suit them better?
A new general election with Boris v Corbyn they might think suits them, alternatively they could get squeezed again and Remainers could be furious with them for backing No Deal for party politics reasons and stay at home or stick with the Tories or Labour
Watching BBC news last night. They were discussing project fear except now by brexiters. At the start the idea of a hard brexit was considered project fear. Now it is a likely option according to fox. Talk of stockpiling drugs was considered project fear now it is considered necessary to negotiate with the EC. Slow down in economy was considered project fear now it is happening but just part of the cost of transition. What is left of project fear?
Mass unemployment, a house price collapse, war and the total destruction of the British economy
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
That is a rejection of the partnership HYUFD....
The customs partnership was basically the Customs Union in all but name bar the levy collection and that is what we will end up with minus the levy collection which will stay with the EU
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Oh no, no deal does not mean no Brexit or rejoin. No Deal means hard Brexit for the best part of a decade at least
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
For the sake of argument assume your analysis is correct. Why would May not throw in a game changer before that point?
Such as?
A second referendum. If you think she's a goner if the Withdrawal Agreement goes to parliament, that's the best way to preempt it.
What possible basis would she have for proposing one? ‘Please lets have a referendum on my crap deal because it is so bad that my own party won’t support it, but Olly says that it would be a good idea if we just Remained?’ If she tried a stunt like that I can imagine the Leavers no-confidencing their own Government. These people have spent their whole political lives fighting to leave the EU.
There is not going to be another referendum. It doesn’t solve anything and there would not be time. The only way to heal the EU division in the UK is to let the Leavers have their way and see if it works. That is what the people voted for. If it doesn’t work, you can always campaign to rejoin.
I think the reason that Remainers are terrified of No Deal is not because they really think it will damage the UK. They are worried that if it doesn’t, they will be proven totally wrong about the benefits of membership and the UK will never, ever rejoin.
The Government don't have a plan that would work, there are too many contradictions. The ONLY way they can resolve it is to have a 'People's Vote' on the possible proposals. Then the people really will have spoken. God help us if the choose 'Crash out to WTO'.
Agreed. Not sure how we get one since no dealers won't want remain as an option on the ballot, and continuity remainers won't want it NOT to be on the ballot, so I guess it depends on Labour? Who I do think will pivot to a vote despite various people saying otherwise - I don't think they will want to share in the responsibility of no deal by voting down the government's plans, but equally won't want to to share in responsibility for a crappy deal by voting for it.
Surely Corbyn’s best outcome is a no deal Brexit that Labour doesn’t vote for? I don’t think people will blame Labour for rejecting the Tory deal, in the same way that voters didn’t punish the Tories for voting for Iraq II.
A chaotic no deal Brexit could catapult Corbyn into office, and give him the tools to irreversibly change this country.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
That is a rejection of the partnership HYUFD....
The customs partnership was basically the Customs Union in all but name bar the levy collection and that is what we will end up with minus the levy collection which will stay with the EU
So it will be a customs union?
In all but name during the transition period yes
Are you deliberately obfuscating? The transition period will be the full status quo minus political representation. The question is what will be negotiated after that.
There is only going to be May’s deal (eg a much sold out version of Chequers) and a vote for or against. I think she will lose this vote. When she does she will resign.
For the sake of argument assume your analysis is correct. Why would May not throw in a game changer before that point?
Such as?
A second referendum. If you think she's a goner if the Withdrawal Agreement goes to parliament, that's the best way to preempt it.
What possible basis would she have for proposing one? ‘Please lets have a referendum on There is not going to be another referendum. It doesn’t solve anything and there would not be time. The only way to heal the EU division in the UK is to let the Leavers have their way and see if it works. That is what the people voted for. If it doesn’t work, you can always campaign to rejoin.
I think the reason that Remainers are terrified of No Deal is not because they really think it will damage the UK. They are worried that if it doesn’t, they will be proven totally wrong about the benefits of membership and the UK will never, ever rejoin.
The Government don't have a plan that would work, there are too many contradictions. The ONLY way they can resolve it is to have a 'People's Vote' on the possible proposals. Then the people really will have spoken. God help us if the choose 'Crash out to WTO'.
Agreed. Not sure how we get one since no dealers won't want remain as an option on the ballot, and continuity remainers won't want it NOT to be on the ballot, so I guess it ting for it.
Surely Corbyn’s best outcome is a no deal Brexit that Labour doesn’t vote for? I don’t think people will blame Labour for rejecting the Tory deal, in the same way that voters didn’t punish the Tories for voting for Iraq II.
A chaotic no deal Brexit could catapult Corbyn into office, and give him the tools to irreversibly change this country.
The polling evidence actually suggests the Tories would do better with No Deal at the next general election than a Deal as it would bring back Tory to UKIP defectors. 46% back No Deal with Yougov, the Tories only need 43% for a majority. Some Labour Remainers may also switch to the LDs if Corbyn votes for No Deal and still refuses to back staying in the single market or a second EU referendum. After all many Labour voters went LD when Blair invaded Iraq.
Though the best route for the Tories would be the transition period then try for a FTA and if not achieved by the next general election then No Deal
Watching BBC news last night. They were discussing project fear except now by brexiters. At the start the idea of a hard brexit was considered project fear. Now it is a likely option according to fox. Talk of stockpiling drugs was considered project fear now it is considered necessary to negotiate with the EC. Slow down in economy was considered project fear now it is happening but just part of the cost of transition. What is left of project fear?
Mass unemployment, a house price collapse, war and the total destruction of the British economy
The polling evidence actually suggests the Tories would do better with No Deal at the next general election than a Deal as it would bring back Tory to UKIP defectors.
Do you *honestly* think polling in August 2018 is a good guide to how people will feel after a real No Deal Brexit?
Surely Corbyn’s best outcome is a no deal Brexit that Labour doesn’t vote for? I don’t think people will blame Labour for rejecting the Tory deal, in the same way that voters didn’t punish the Tories for voting for Iraq II.
A chaotic no deal Brexit could catapult Corbyn into office, and give him the tools to irreversibly change this country.
Possibly. It's high risk. Yes, the Tories would obviously be blamed more and be punished more, that is the case with any Brexit outcome, but I think unless one is in favour of no deal, which Labour officially are not, then there is a degree of harm in being seen to reject a deal, aligning with JRM and the headbangers. After all, this is not the end of the road, the battle post deal will be on what each side thinks the future relationship will look like and how it will develop - a bad deal still allows Labour to say it is bad, better than no deal, but that we need a new GE so that Labour can take the reins and ensure the future relationship is good.
Given Labour are so popular with remainers, not all of whom will want no deal to get back in sooner, I think there is a risk in enabling JRM and co which they could be better off avoiding.
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
That is a rejection of the partnership HYUFD....
The customs partnership was basically the Customs Union in all but name bar the levy collection and that is what we will end up with minus the levy collection which will stay with the EU
So it will be a customs union?
In all but name during the transition period yes
Are you deliberately obfuscating? The transition period will be the full status quo minus political representation. The question is what will be negotiated after that.
I have not argued with that. As I said if a FTA is agreed during the transition period and before the next general election fine, otherwise rather than an indefinite transition the Tories will go to No Deal by the end date of the proposed transition in December 2020 and before the next general election
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Oh no, no deal does not mean no Brexit or rejoin. No Deal means hard Brexit for the best part of a decade at least
It doesn't matter what no deal means, it matters what people think it means or what politicians say it means. As your take on a Tory leader goes, it doesn't really matter in that contest if Boris would help people retain their seats, it matters whether enough people think he would. Some, on here and elsewhere, are saying that no deal will be so disastrous rejoining is much more likely. It doesn't matter if that is a correct assumption. The point is that plenty of people who might genuinely think no deal is bad still might not vote for a deal of any kind - they will also still all blame the Tories in any case.
OT I've just noticed, on logging out of the ERS web site after confirming my right to vote, that the links to online help and the ERS policy statement are both in Welsh: Help Ar-lein and Datganiad Polisi.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Oh no, no deal does not mean no Brexit or rejoin. No Deal means hard Brexit for the best part of a decade at least
It doesn't matter what no deal means, it matters what people think it means or what politicians say it means. As your take on a Tory leader goes, it doesn't really matter in that contest if Boris would help people retain their seats, it matters whether enough people think he would. Some, on here and elsewhere, are saying that no deal will be so disastrous rejoining is much more likely. It doesn't matter if that is a correct assumption. The point is that plenty of people who might genuinely think no deal is bad still might not vote for a deal of any kind - they will also still all blame the Tories in any case.
Fine. What do the Tories care, those who want to reverse Brexit will almost all be Labour or LD voters anyway. Plus Corbyn remains as pro Brexit as ever so unless the LDs win it makes no difference to reversing Brexit.
It is Tory to UKIP defectors the Tories need to win back to win the next general election
Watching BBC news last night. They were discussing project fear except now by brexiters. At the start the idea of a hard brexit was considered project fear. Now it is a likely option according to fox. Talk of stockpiling drugs was considered project fear now it is considered necessary to negotiate with the EC. Slow down in economy was considered project fear now it is happening but just part of the cost of transition. What is left of project fear?
Mass unemployment, a house price collapse, war and the total destruction of the British economy
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
I don't know if it is the key factor - I think that is the significant though not majority faction who favour no deal - but I think it is an important one. People are going all or nothing, but it seems a riskier game to me for the continuity remainers than the no deal leavers - the former have to hope in the chaos a series of steps occur which help prevent Brexit at all, which is fraught with issues hard to control, while the latter just have to hope they can obstruct things long enough that they win by default, and collectively prevent remain becoming an option.
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
.......the consequences of Brexit have compromised the entire EMA, which will affect all remaining member states. Not only will this make it more complicated for European life science companies to reach regulatory approval for their treatments, it also mitigates the EU’s active role in addressing global public health issues.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
Nope. They will end up with Boris and a Boris v Corbyn general election
The EU has largely accepted the goods regulation alignment, they just don't want us collecting customs levies on behalf of the EU.
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement.
If the customs partnership has been rejected, by what logic is that what we're likely to end up with?
It has not been rejected, the EU has welcomed the regulatory alignment on goods they just do not want the UK accepting customs levies on behalf of the EU
That is a rejection of the partnership HYUFD....
The customs partnership was basically the Customs Union in all but name bar the levy collection and that is what we will end up with minus the levy collection which will stay with the EU
So it will be a customs union?
In all but name during the transition period yes
Are you deliberately obfuscating? The transition period will be the full status quo minus political representation. The question is what will be negotiated after that.
I have not argued with that. As I said if a FTA is agreed during the transition period and before the next general election fine, otherwise rather than an indefinite transition the Tories will go to No Deal by the end date of the proposed transition in December 2020 and before the next general election
No Deal is currently used as shorthand for no withdrawal agreement. What you are suggesting is not that, but going off the second cliff edge having agreed the divorce bill and signed the Northern Ireland backstop which would mean the backstop gets activated.
PB Tory activists: does anyone know if the party does checks on people joining i.e. are they a member of another party?
Strikes me that if Tory constituency parties are seeing 20 or 30 people joining in a very short time, then this is co-ordinated and probably means they are either still kipper members or are lapsed ones, or worse, far right activists from Britain First or whatever (although doubt they would have these kinds of numbers).
Or they could be remainers who have concluded that joining their local party gives them the most effective means of fighting Brexit.
Whilst a company can legally claim it has one corporate structure to country A and a different structure to company B these kind of shenanigans will continue.
Not even country-by-country reporting can stop this, only global harmonisation/info sharing on declared corporate structures.
£8bn of UK sales being booked in Luxemburg seems to me an obvious place to start. Profits are being diverted from where they are generated to our very considerable cost. Amazon's bill should have been 100x what it was.
New law - for every ten migrant workers a business employs it has to fund a new house being built.
For multinationals reduce to every five workers, for workers being paid under average earnings reduce to every two workers.
What's that got to do with profits being booked overseas?
Its a way of getting businesses which are dependent upon cheap migrant labour to contribute towards the housing and public services costs consequent to it.
It would be especially useful for those companies which have operations in this country but avoid paying corporation tax here by booking their profits in low tax countries.
What evidence do you have that Amazon is dependant on cheap migrant labour? Multiple sources which are more than just anecdote please.
' The recruitment agencies that supplied eastern Europeans to Amazon warned their workers that, if they made a fuss about their conditions, there was a reserve army of their fellow countrymen ready to take their place. Bloodworth and his colleagues made about £250 a week. The average weekly wage in Romania was a little over £100. One migrant told Bloodworth he worked like an animal and was a nobody in the UK. But in Romania he would be a nobody without enough to eat. '
Do you think that Amazon DON'T make use of cheap migrant labour ???
They make use of migrant labour. That doesn’t mean that it’s cheap. Your implication is that native (or in UkIP parlance, white) labour has lost out. You’ve shown no evidence of that.
You should stick to fondling strawberry packets. Which does rely on migrant labour because the public care about no more than cheap food (and always have done).
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Oh no, no deal does not mean no Brexit or rejoin. No Deal means hard Brexit for the best part of a decade at least
It doesn't matter what no deal means, it matters what people think it means or what politicians say it means. As your take on a Tory leader goes, it doesn't really matter in that contest if Boris would help people retain their seats, it matters whether enough people think he would. Some, on here and elsewhere, are saying that no deal will be so disastrous rejoining is much more likely. It doesn't matter if that is a correct assumption. The point is that plenty of people who might genuinely think no deal is bad still might not vote for a deal of any kind - they will also still all blame the Tories in any case.
Fine. What do the Tories care, those who want to reverse Brexit will almost all be Labour or LD voters anyway. Plus Corbyn remains as pro Brexit as ever so unless the LDs win it makes no difference to reversing Brexit.
It is Tory to UKIP defectors the Tories need to win back to win the next general election
The Tories should care because there are more important things than winning the next election, and so far the MPs and the government have made the case that the deal May wants is better for the country than no deal. If they believe that they should go for it and then spend the next 4 years trying to recover the votes that will cost them. They would still have a chance of winning the next GE.
If they don't think no deal is bad then that is yet another reason they should have junked May long ago when it was clear that the EU was not willing to bend on its red lines at all, therefore no deal on terms we would like were coming. If it would be so popular why have they not done that, and instead allowed May to continue to try to pursue this?
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
I don't know if it is the key factor - I think that is the significant though not majority faction who favour no deal - but I think it is an important one. People are going all or nothing, but it seems a riskier game to me for the continuity remainers than the no deal leavers - the former have to hope in the chaos a series of steps occur which help prevent Brexit at all, which is fraught with issues hard to control, while the latter just have to hope they can obstruct things long enough that they win by default, and collectively prevent remain becoming an option.
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
Yes the choice is deal with May or hard Brexit no deal with Boris or Mogg not deal or Remain/2nd referendum if no deal
Watching BBC news last night. They were discussing project fear except now by brexiters. At the start the idea of a hard brexit was considered project fear. Now it is a likely option according to fox. Talk of stockpiling drugs was considered project fear now it is considered necessary to negotiate with the EC. Slow down in economy was considered project fear now it is happening but just part of the cost of transition. What is left of project fear?
Mass unemployment, a house price collapse, war and the total destruction of the British economy
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Oh no, no deal does not mean no Brexit or rejoin. No Deal means hard Brexit for the best part of a decade at least
It doesn't matter what no deal means, it matters what people think it means or what politicians say it means. As your take on a Tory leader goes, it doesn't really matter in that contest ill also still all blame the Tories in any case.
Fine. What do the Tories care, those who want to reverse Brexit will almost all be Labour or LD voters anyway. Plus Corbyn remains as pro Brexit as ever so unless the LDs win it makes no difference to reversing Brexit.
It is Tory to UKIP defectors the Tories need to win back to win the next general election
The Tories should care because there are more important things than winning the next election, and so far the MPs and the government have made the case that the deal May wants is better for the country than no deal. If they believe that they should go for it and then spend the next 4 years trying to recover the votes that will cost them. They would still have a chance of winning the next GE.
If they don't think no deal is bad then that is yet another reason they should have junked May long ago when it was clear that the EU was not willing to bend on its red lines at all, therefore no deal on terms we would like were coming. If it would be so popular why have they not done that, and instead allowed May to continue to try to pursue this?
Not with Corbyn as Labour leader there aren't. Tory MPs are also not going to go into the next general election with a Deal that will cost them their seats, any transition period has to have ended by the next general election for them. However they will still try for a transition period to show Tory Remainers they tried their best for a FTA then pivot by the next general election to get back Tory to UKIP defectors and reassure Tory Leavers who make up most of the party by going for No Deal if necessary
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
I don't know if it is the key factor - I think that is the significant though not majority faction who favour no deal - but I think it is an important one. People are going all or nothing, but it seems a riskier game to me for the continuity remainers than the no deal leavers - the former have to hope in the chaos a series of steps occur which help prevent Brexit at all, which is fraught with issues hard to control, while the latter just have to hope they can obstruct things long enough that they win by default, and collectively prevent remain becoming an option.
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
Yes the choice is deal with May or hard Brexit no deal with Boris or Mogg not deal or Remain/2nd referendum if no deal
Boris would totally do a deal. He'd run against it, knife TMay, lead his supporters in a patriotic song then go back and sign on the dotted line. He's probably already practising the Tsipras shrug.
OT I've just noticed, on logging out of the ERS web site after confirming my right to vote, that the links to online help and the ERS policy statement are both in Welsh: Help Ar-lein and Datganiad Polisi.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
I don't know if it is the key factor - I think that is the significant though not majority faction who favour no deal - but I think it is an important one. People are going all or nothing, but it seems a riskier game to me for the continuity remainers than the no deal leavers - the former have to hope in the chaos a series of steps occur which help prevent Brexit at all, which is fraught with issues hard to control, while the latter just have to hope they can obstruct things long enough that they win by default, and collectively prevent remain becoming an option.
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
I agree it's probably more risky for remainers tha hard leavers. But I think the likelihood is that there WILL be panic in the months leading up to no deal Brexit (if that is what happens). The failure of project fear to materialise up to now has lulled people into a false sense of security - remainers have cried wolf far too often. But the wolf fable ends when the animal really does appear and devours the unfortunate boy, whose warnings are not believed. A no deal Brexit, for which the government has done zero preparation, could well do the same to the UK.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
I don't know if it is the key factor - I think that is the significant though not majority faction who favour no deal - but I think it is an important one. People are going all or nothing, but it seems a riskier game to me for the continuity remainers than the no deal leavers - the former have to hope in the chaos a series of steps occur which help prevent Brexit at all, which is fraught with issues hard to control, while the latter just have to hope they can obstruct things long enough that they win by default, and collectively prevent remain becoming an option.
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
Yes the choice is deal with May or hard Brexit no deal with Boris or Mogg not deal or Remain/2nd referendum if no deal
Boris would totally do a deal. He'd run against it, knife TMay, lead his supporters in a patriotic song then go back and sign on the dotted line. He's probably already practising the Tsipras shrug.
He won't as he needs to win back Tory to UKIP defectors to beat Corbyn and no deal will be better than May is offering which the EU will accept and which respects the red lines
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
I don't know if it is the key factor - I think that is the significant though not majority faction who favour no deal - but I think it is an important one. People are going all or nothing, but it seems a riskier game to me for the continuity remainers than the no deal leavers - the former have to hope in the chaos a series of steps occur which help prevent Brexit at all, which is fraught with issues hard to control, while the latter just have to hope they can obstruct things long enough that they win by default, and collectively prevent remain becoming an option.
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
Yes the choice is deal with May or hard Brexit no deal with Boris or Mogg not deal or Remain/2nd referendum if no deal
Boris would totally do a deal. He'd run against it, knife TMay, lead his supporters in a patriotic song then go back and sign on the dotted line. He's probably already practising the Tsipras shrug.
+1
Flexibility can be a strength, but everything he does seems calculated as to how it benefits his attempts to become leader, even his resignation was less credible, compelling and convincing than that of Davis. I truly hope he is not the next Tory leader.
Even without Umunna and allies and the SNP she could likely get it through with the LDs and DUP
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
Plenty of people no deal means either no brexit, somehow, or we will rejoin all the sooner, I cannot see the LDs voting for any deal. And given how unpopular the action is I don't see how more Tories don't break ranks on it. Fox is underestimating no deal chances.
Yes that's the key factor pushing toward no deal - remainer MPs now think no deal would be so disruptive that the whole Brexit process would collapse. Hence the opposition of Mandelson, Greening etc to the Chequers proposals. They think that as the cliff edge approaches there will be panic and the government will be forced to backtrack by extending or even revoking article 50. And they could be right.
I don't knowO deal.
I agree it's probably more risky for remainers tha hard leavers. But I think the likelihood is that there WILL be panic in the months leading up to no deal Brexit (if that is what happens). The failure of project fear to materialise up to now has lulled people into a false sense of security - remainers have cried wolf far too often. But the wolf fable ends when the animal really does appear and devours the unfortunate boy, whose warnings are not believed. A no deal Brexit, for which the government has done zero preparation, could well do the same to the UK.
Oh, I think there is a chance, as there will be a panic. I'm panicking about it right now for instance. But if May is, against the odds, able to cobble together something close to Chequers, which both parties can then spend the next decade arguing about how far to diverge further from that, then that might be strategically better than a hail mary pass to stop Brexit, or making a massive assumption that even when things turn out to be really bad, there will still be a simple path to rejoin.
Comments
I call this Limbo Brexit, and it could be agreed by EEA Leavers, and No Dealers as it keeps both options open, but with time for the latter to finally pull their finger out over preparations.
https://labiotech.eu/policy-legal-finance/ema-prepares-brexit/
It would be especially useful for those companies which have operations in this country but avoid paying corporation tax here by booking their profits in low tax countries.
There is not going to be another referendum. It doesn’t solve anything and there would not be time. The only way to heal the EU division in the UK is to let the Leavers have their way and see if it works. That is what the people voted for. If it doesn’t work, you can always campaign to rejoin.
I think the reason that Remainers are terrified of No Deal is not because they really think it will damage the UK. They are worried that if it doesn’t, they will be proven totally wrong about the benefits of membership and the UK will never, ever rejoin.
[Stands back an awaits the howls of protest...]
... the Government resigns. (Not just May but the Government). A potential government will be put together PDQ to avert a no deal, possibly lead by Grieve. First task, get an extension of A50. EU will agree. They don't want a no deal either. Second task - a referendum on no deal, May's deal or remain. Third task - execute the result of the referendum. Fourth task - resign for a GE. This won't happen though. May's deal will be passed and the can kicked down the road.
That seems a strange non-sequitur BJO.
Is it a reference to that Venezuelan campaign by Maduro getting people to farm rabbits for food?
For example
1. Selling Kindles at a loss and then earning income from selling electronic books in future years
2. Using the profits of its online sales site to finance expansion into providing cloud services.
By investing this way, Amazon is doing what politicians are constantly encouraging businesses to do and favour the long term over the short term.
1) Given it is the Sunday Sport, is this some kind of euphemism, and if so for what?
2) I would not have thought a gentleman of taste, intelligence and wit - such as yourself - would read the Sunday Sport. How the f*** did you come across it?
I recommend this article to him:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/cognitive-bias/565775/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=danYFxGnFxQ
Even if Corbyn wins he may do the same eventually if Corbyn becomes unpopular, rember Macron only founded En Marche as Hollande looked like losing to Les Republicains or even falling behind Le Pen and Front National on the Socialist Party ticket
(Edit - I suppose if it were true, which BTW seems unlikely, the most embarrassing thing for Corbyn would be how upper-class it all sounds.)
Was it upper class to get a pogo stick for Christmas!!
Regulatory alignment on services plus a CU is no different than EEA plus CU. No way May can sell that to her party.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/24263077/fast-learner-ollie-pope-makes-rapid-strides-towards-england-contention
And is a right hander, to boot.
One of Ed Smith’s better ideas ?
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/mar/11/hired-six-months-undercover-in-low-wage-britain-zero-hours-review-james-bloodworth
Do you think that Amazon DON'T make use of cheap migrant labour ???
We will likely end up with regulatory alignment on services plus the Customs Partnership with the mobility framework replacing free movement. The ERG and Boris and Davis etc will vote against it as will Corbyn Labour but May might get it through with the bulk of Tory votes plus the LDs and SNP and the DUP and maybe Umunna and a few anti hard Brexit Labour rebels
Sounds optimistic.
I don't think your migrant taxaspossible. Not many work for long at Amazon, there is a lot ofchurn to more stable and renumerative jobs, often after a few months.
What Amazon needs is unionisation to stop exploitative practices.
Essentially the vote will be a choice between voting with May for a transition deal or voting with Mogg and Boris for No Deal
The ONLY way they can resolve it is to have a 'People's Vote' on the possible proposals. Then the people really will have spoken.
God help us if the choose 'Crash out to WTO'.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/07/want-understand-brexit-just-look-sports-direct
but what we have are big businesses making use of cheap migrant labour without contributing to the housing and social costs which result.
Many of these giant warehouses are built on the actual sites of former coal mines.
I've mentioned this before but a century ago some of my ancestors moved to Yorkshire to work in similar mines and mining companies didn't only provide a place of work but also contributed to new housing and in the provision of the required increase in public services.
I don't see the likes of Amazon offering that now - instead its the local communities which have to bear the extra housing and public services responsibilities.
The only polls I can find from Google are months old.
https://twitter.com/BoardofDeputies/status/1026089765244989440
A chaotic no deal Brexit could catapult Corbyn into office, and give him the tools to irreversibly change this country.
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/political-monitor-archive
and by own party support here
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/satisfaction-leaders-amongst-party-supporters
Though the best route for the Tories would be the transition period then try for a FTA and if not achieved by the next general election then No Deal
Given Labour are so popular with remainers, not all of whom will want no deal to get back in sooner, I think there is a risk in enabling JRM and co which they could be better off avoiding.
It is Tory to UKIP defectors the Tories need to win back to win the next general election
I see the evil left wing fool who has caused great harm to his nation has managed to escape the most recent attack upon him.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3948109/humiliation-for-lib-dems-as-their-claim-of-a-brexit-strawberry-shortage-is-branded-fake-news/
Either could be right, there is that possibility, but I think the no deal leavers have the simpler path to their goal, and failure for them is more likely to be that a deal is reached rather than remain. Failure for the continuity remainers is more likely to be no deal than we leave with a BINO deal.
There is no objective reason why you have to be a member of the away to be a member of the EMA*
* and yes, @williamglenn I know. But rules should be changed when they are stupid and counterproductive
You should stick to fondling strawberry packets. Which does rely on migrant labour because the public care about no more than cheap food (and always have done).
If they don't think no deal is bad then that is yet another reason they should have junked May long ago when it was clear that the EU was not willing to bend on its red lines at all, therefore no deal on terms we would like were coming. If it would be so popular why have they not done that, and instead allowed May to continue to try to pursue this?
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1026090498262532096?s=19
"Come on, Arlene"
Flexibility can be a strength, but everything he does seems calculated as to how it benefits his attempts to become leader, even his resignation was less credible, compelling and convincing than that of Davis. I truly hope he is not the next Tory leader.
Boris is shameless. His ambition eclipses everything.