Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Twisting on 17: the hardline Leavers’ great gamble

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited September 12 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Twisting on 17: the hardline Leavers’ great gamble

Picture credit @DelMody on twitter

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 25,234
    Hard to disagree with much of this.

    I’ve always favoured a practical compromise.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,239
    There is, and never will be a a commons majority for a hard Brexit. The ERG are in fantasy land.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 29,805
    edited September 12
    I see Putin says the two GRU officers who contiminated half of Salisbury are just civilians....that will be good enough for jezza and Milne.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536

    I see Putin says the two GRU officers who contiminated half of Salisbury are just civilians....that will be good enough for jezza and Milne.

    Im surprised theyre still alive
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,239

    I see Putin says the two GRU officers who contiminated half of Salisbury are just civilians....that will be good enough for jezza and Milne.

    So some blokes just fancied for a laugh to travel from Russia to the UK to murder someone??

    Still the leftie loonies will gobble that line up.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 29,805
    edited September 12

    I see Putin says the two GRU officers who contiminated half of Salisbury are just civilians....that will be good enough for jezza and Milne.

    So some blokes just fancied for a laugh to travel from Russia to the UK to murder someone??

    Still the leftie loonies will gobble that line up.
    The worlds crappiest Stag do....
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 1,642
    Putin is just pointing to the poor saps whose identities were stolen.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,499
    At this stage - TM must know she needs Labour votes to get Brexit over the line. Given that, why not abandon her red line on the customs union?

    The ERG aren't going to vote for whatever she comes out with anyway.
  • So this explains why Mixed Martial Arts never appealed to me.

    Fascist fight clubs: how white nationalists use MMA as a recruiting tool

    Far-right groups across Europe and North America are using mixed martial arts to swell their numbers, spread their ideology and fight their enemies

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/sep/11/far-right-fight-clubs-mma-white-nationalists
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,499
    rkrkrk said:

    At this stage - TM must know she needs Labour votes to get Brexit over the line. Given that, why not abandon her red line on the customs union?

    The ERG aren't going to vote for whatever she comes out with anyway.

    I think she promised some who might vote it down that there would be no more concessions.

    As there will have to be concessions, as the EU has rejected the deal, then you are probably still right.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,499
    Er, like it is an accurate reflection of events. :lol:
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536
    EU Parlt reviewing Junckers time in office.
  • The will of the people must be respected and we must leave no matter what next March.

    The voters knew that no deal was a possibility, in fact Mrs May encouraged them afterwards with the ‘No Deal is better than a bad deal’ mantra.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,489
    All very true. Leavers didn't even give themselves a moment's jubilation before they started to bitch and moan.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,489

    So this explains why Mixed Martial Arts never appealed to me.

    Fascist fight clubs: how white nationalists use MMA as a recruiting tool

    Far-right groups across Europe and North America are using mixed martial arts to swell their numbers, spread their ideology and fight their enemies

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/sep/11/far-right-fight-clubs-mma-white-nationalists

    You could say the same thing about almost any activity. Not surprised the Graun is happy to link MMA here.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536
    Farage in EU Parliament
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,188

    There is, and never will be a a commons majority for a hard Brexit. The ERG are in fantasy land.

    In many respects they are quite similar to Corbyn/McDonald; they want to tear down the economy and rebuild from the rubble.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748

    I see Putin says the two GRU officers who contiminated half of Salisbury are just civilians....that will be good enough for jezza and Milne.

    I’m sure they are now!
  • Andreas Schleicher, the OECD’s director of education and skills, said too many young people emerging from university were ending up in low-paid, non-graduate jobs in the UK because they lacked the basic numeracy and literacy skills that should be expected from a university education.

    Of the 70% graduates who went to a non-elite university, 28% were doing shift work, 3% were on a zero-hour contract and 17% were underemployed. Among those without a degree, meanwhile, 19% were doing shift work, 2% were on a zero-hour contract and 30% were underemployed.

    “Graduating from non-Russell Group university increases the probability of insecure employment, such as shift work or zero-hours contracts, compared to those without a degree,” said Holcekova.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536
    Verhofstadt now wants to colonise Africa again
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,450

    Farage in EU Parliament

    Sad to see employees forced to work after being made redundant
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,116
    edited September 12
    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 68,320
    edited September 12
    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/02/04/tory-mp-rees-mogg-i-take-my-whip-from-the-roman-catholic-church/amp/
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,116

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
  • There is, and never will be a a commons majority for a hard Brexit. The ERG are in fantasy land.

    If there isn't a majority for anything else, then it's default position and the clock is ticking.

    It all really comes down to Labour, they are lead by a de-facto but undeclared hard brexiter, a socialist JRM. Will the bulk of the parliamentary party follow Corbyn over the cliff ? If so, no deal.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536

    Farage in EU Parliament

    Sad to see employees forced to work after being made redundant
    his jobs just been taken by a Pole
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,489
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
    Can we not adduce that the Roman Catholic church might also profess not to like adultery?
  • tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-41172426
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,499
    Nigelb said:

    There is, and never will be a a commons majority for a hard Brexit. The ERG are in fantasy land.

    In many respects they are quite similar to Corbyn/McDonald; they want to tear down the economy and rebuild from the rubble.
    Nah, completely different belief systems.

    Jezza and co believe in the Magic Money Tree.

    ERG believe in unicorns.

    There was a hundred year war over smaller religious differences.
  • TOPPING said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
    Can we not adduce that the Roman Catholic church might also profess not to like adultery?
    God/The Catholic Church are ok with adultery, honestly if they were opposed to adultery they’d have some rule about it if God had carved his opposition to adultery in stone.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,693
    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 6,123

    Hard to disagree with much of this.

    I’ve always favoured a practical compromise.

    Chequers was an attempt at a compromise.
    There's no plan from the ERG because there are too many contradictions for such a plan to be possible. There's no possible plan that has a majority in the HoC. In the end the electorate will have to choose between a few of the possibilities, which will need to be spelt out clearly, in a People's Vote or a General Election.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 2,829
    So there is speculation again about a coup and mounting numbers of letters going into the Brady box.

    Even if May ultimately wins, could the VoNC pressure her into changing Chequers for a Canada type deal?
  • CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
  • TOPPING said:

    All very true. Leavers didn't even give themselves a moment's jubilation before they started to bitch and moan.

    Farage in EU Parliament

    Sad to see employees forced to work after being made redundant
    his jobs just been taken by a Pole
    Haha. Very good Mr Alanbrooke. I am not sure how any Polish person could manage to look as twatish though, so the ability to fully fit the job may require some compromise
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
    Funnily enough, people who believe in the sanctity of life are opposed to the killing of unborn children.
  • edbedb Posts: 24
    happy to castigate Cameron for that but it seems like water under the bridge?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,116

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-41172426
    Far be it from me, an atheist, to defend Christians, but isn't there a difference between marriage and abortion? For a Christian, they see marriage as a religious institution. For them, gay marriage does not make sense because marriage, in their eyes, is between a man and a woman.

    Personally I couldn't care less about marriage. But abortion is different. And whilst I think it's probably better for it to be legal, I do understand those like JRM who oppose it. The point being that whilst JRM's views on marriage may come directly from being a Christian, views on abortion and adultery may not.
  • Nigelb said:

    There is, and never will be a a commons majority for a hard Brexit. The ERG are in fantasy land.

    In many respects they are quite similar to Corbyn/McDonald; they want to tear down the economy and rebuild from the rubble.
    Nah, completely different belief systems.

    Jezza and co believe in the Magic Money Tree.

    ERG believe in unicorns.

    There was a hundred year war over smaller religious differences.
    The Magic Trade Tree is not too dissimilar in its mythical status to be fair. It is a newer article of faith than the Magic Money Tree, but similar in its ridiculousness
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 18,090
    This coup malarkey is 95% comprised of a stick to stop TM backtracking any further from Chequers.

    Still it keeps the hacks excited.

  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 1,297

    CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Cameron called the referendum. He could, and should, have had the country vote on a specific vision of Brexit.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 18,090

    Verhofstadt now wants to colonise Africa again

    Is it not more of a reverse take over ?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536
    edited September 12
    Farage on the floor - tells Verhofstadt sign a deal and youll get what you want - youl;l see the back of us

    Verhofstadt applauds
  • CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Or, why can't we be like Norway or Switzerland (regularly suggested by Farage)?, and then as soon as the result is in arguing that everyone voted to get out of the single market. Lying bastards.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,499

    CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Oliver Letwin admitted it to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee?
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/20/david-cameron-accused-gross-negligence-brexit-contingency-plans

    It was the same with the Sindy referendum also.

    In fact I think Cameron even said it himself here (paywall)
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cameron-we-have-no-brexit-plan-htt5nt0w6l2
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 16,044
    edited September 12
    Good article Alastair.

    On the ERG reports this morning seem to indicate they are falling out with each other and there is little prospect of an attempt to VNOC TM.

    My position is clear. I want TM to get a deal and for it to pass as it would be Brexit. Once out our politicians can then finesse the relationship with the EU as a work in progress.

    However, if TM deal fails I want Parliament to use their large majority to stop WTO in its tracks and I do believe they have the numbers, and with the pro EU majority in the HOL, should be able to get through emergency legislation very quickly

    Last night the hard Brexiteers made it clear they are happy to sacrifice UK manufacturing (including my families employment) and also the union with Scotland and Northern Ireland on the altar of their obsession.

    The good news is that it will be stopped, one way or another
  • Farage on the floor - tells Verhofstadt sign a deal and youll get what you want - youl;l see the back of us

    Verhofstadt applauds

    Is that meant to be a news item Mr Alan Brooke that Guy Verhofstadt doesn't like Nigel Farage?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748
    TGOHF said:

    This coup malarkey is 95% comprised of a stick to stop TM backtracking any further from Chequers.

    Still it keeps the hacks excited.

    It’s getting to the point now where even the politically engaged are switching off. Let’s all wait until there’s a deal on the table to discuss.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,146
    CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.

    1) I fundamentally disagree with this. Leave had the main great advantage: they didn't have a plan, and therefore could promise whatever anyone who was remotely Eurosceptical wanted. They could tell racist idiots that it would stop all those funny foreigners getting in, and it could tell sane leavers that it would mean minimal changes, all positive (e.g. the EEA route). As we are finding, these promises are incompatible. This is how they won, and it was the great lie at the heart of the referendum. And it's a lie that's biting us in the backside now.

    2) As I've argued in the past, *any* alternative plan would be dismissed by the leavers: and they would need to do so, as collapsing the probability waveforms of what 'Brexit' means would reduce their vote. If leavers can't decide what it means two years after the vote, how could a government impose one - we'd just have got the mess we're in now, with the ERG'ers arguing against it - or the other side arguing against it. These arguments would have helped leave - e.g. "Look, they want a soft Brexit, and those smelly people will still be stealing your jobs!"

    3) The question was binary, but the laziness of leavers before the referendum (a planned one, as it happens) meant that what the result means is uncertain. That is the responsibility of the lazy leavers who have wasted two years.

    4) I'm uncertain about another referendum, but if we end up in a stalemate then it's hard to see another way out of it. God knows what the question should be.

    Personally, I'm veering towards Chequers. It seems the only sane plan on the table.
  • Good article Alastair.

    On the ERG reports this morning seem to indicate they are falling out with each other and there is little prospect of an attempt to VNOC TM.

    My position is clear. I want TM to get a deal and for it to pass as it would be Brexit. Once out our politicians can then finesse the relationship with the EU as a work in progress.

    However, if TM deal fails I want Parliament to use their large majority to stop WTO in its tracks and I do believe they have the numbers, and with the pro EU majority in the HOL, should be able to get through emergency legislation very quickly

    Last night the hard Brexiteers made it clear they are happy to sacrifice UK manufacturing (including my families employment) and also the union with Scotland and Northern Ireland on the altar of their obsession.

    The good news is that it will be stopped, one way or another

    It's a cult for the headbangers.... they seem to be all the rage..
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 68,320
    edited September 12
    rkrkrk said:

    CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Oliver Letwin admitted it to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee?
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/20/david-cameron-accused-gross-negligence-brexit-contingency-plans

    It was the same with the Sindy referendum also.

    In fact I think Cameron even said it himself here (paywall)
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cameron-we-have-no-brexit-plan-htt5nt0w6l2
    Comments taken out of context.

    They began planning but could reconcile the unbelievable promises of Leave and Yes.

    For example Yes said the Bank of England would be an Independent Scotland’s lender of last resort and the FCA/PRA would supervise the Financial Services/Banking sectors, both would have been illegal.
  • CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Cameron called the referendum. He could, and should, have had the country vote on a specific vision of Brexit.
    I agree, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. Cameron, who I think was an essentially decent man, allowed his ego to tell him that he could win the referendum and put the issue to bed. History is sadly littered with disasters that have been the result of powerful men thinking they have a simple answer. It is the ordinary man and woman that have to pick up the pieces that result from their folly
  • Two years on Leavers still can’t explain their vision for a precise Brexit, how was Cameron supposed to guess?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,146

    CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Cameron called the referendum. He could, and should, have had the country vote on a specific vision of Brexit.
    Say he had; what would it have said, and how do you think the various leave camps would have reacted?

    Hint: leave wanted to win.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536

    Two years on Leavers still can’t explain their vision for a precise Brexit, how was Cameron supposed to guess?

    Cameron couldnt explain his position or what was his vision of staying in
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,693
    Mr Eagles,

    "Two is such bullshit."

    A subjective view, but you clearly are not familiar with how the CS works. Why has no one asked Cameron the question? Because they know the answer. The default is not to be unprepared, it's to have alternatives.

    Yes, it's now water under the bridge, except for Remainers who still seize upon it to bash Brexit.
  • I mean yesterday the ERG said they’d abolish all standards for imports/exports but since before the referendum there’d be no weakening of standards.

    Tell me how Dave was supposed to wargame that?
  • mattmatt Posts: 1,849
    TOPPING said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
    Can we not adduce that the Roman Catholic church might also profess not to like adultery?
    Quite keen on single men and schoolboys though.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748

    CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Cameron called the referendum. He could, and should, have had the country vote on a specific vision of Brexit.
    That was indeed the biggest mistake.

    A referendum works when the government are proposing something specific and are asking for approval. It doesn’t work when the government support the status quo and allows something non-specific as an alternative.

    The correct approach would have been to have the referendum as EU membership vs EEA membership, we could have debated the pros and cons of both organisations before the vote. Those in favour of WTO or similar would mostly have supported EEU as a loosening of the relationship on the way to the preferred destination.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 16,499
    matt said:

    TOPPING said:

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Are JRM's views on abortion about him being a Christian? Or is just his own personal view?

    I don't recall him saying "in the eyes of God" or something similar.
    Jacob Rees-Mogg spoke on Radio 4’s Westminster Hour on Sunday. He said of the same-sex marriage bill vote this Tuesday: “I’m not under any pressure. I’m a Roman Catholic and have made it clear to my constituents that in this sort of matter I take my whip from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Whip’s Office.”

    And abortion?
    Can we not adduce that the Roman Catholic church might also profess not to like adultery?
    Quite keen on single men and schoolboys though.
    And the Sun rotating around the Earth.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,135
    Freggles said:


    Even if May ultimately wins, could the VoNC pressure her into changing Chequers for a Canada type deal?

    A failed VoNC will strengthen May's hand - she can't be challenged again for another year. Hence the Brexiteers timidity. If you come for the queen, best not to miss.....
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536

    I mean yesterday the ERG said they’d abolish all standards for imports/exports but since before the referendum there’d be no weakening of standards.

    Tell me how Dave was supposed to wargame that?

    by saying what he would do, it would force the opposition to respond
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,009



    1) I fundamentally disagree with this. Leave had the main great advantage: they didn't have a plan, and therefore could promise whatever anyone who was remotely Eurosceptical wanted. They could tell racist idiots that it would stop all those funny foreigners getting in, and it could tell sane leavers that it would mean minimal changes, all positive (e.g. the EEA route). As we are finding, these promises are incompatible. This is how they won, and it was the great lie at the heart of the referendum. And it's a lie that's biting us in the backside now.

    2) As I've argued in the past, *any* alternative plan would be dismissed by the leavers: and they would need to do so, as collapsing the probability waveforms of what 'Brexit' means would reduce their vote. If leavers can't decide what it means two years after the vote, how could a government impose one - we'd just have got the mess we're in now, with the ERG'ers arguing against it - or the other side arguing against it. These arguments would have helped leave - e.g. "Look, they want a soft Brexit, and those smelly people will still be stealing your jobs!"

    3) The question was binary, but the laziness of leavers before the referendum (a planned one, as it happens) meant that what the result means is uncertain. That is the responsibility of the lazy leavers who have wasted two years.

    4) I'm uncertain about another referendum, but if we end up in a stalemate then it's hard to see another way out of it. God knows what the question should be.

    Personally, I'm veering towards Chequers. It seems the only sane plan on the table.

    I wrote in favour of Chequers when it came out for that reason:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/09/a-better-ole/

    I considered extending the WW1 metaphor for this article by noting that Leavers, by abandoning Chequers, had found themselves trapped in no man's land, but remembered that Leavers get unnaturally excited by references to World Wars.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748
    As expected, political journalist completely failing to understand aviation - again.

    Civil Aviation Authorty vs Faisal Islam and Sky News.
    https://order-order.com/2018/09/12/caa-shoots-misleading-sky-news-scaremongering-pilot-licenses/
  • RogerRoger Posts: 9,592
    Very good header. Your Michelin restaurant metaphor is almost perfect. The most hideous of all Leavers- IDS- yesterday said almost precisely that. "It's not our job to say what kind of Brexit we want that's for the government. We just have to say what we don't want and you can start with Chequers''

    How such an unattractive politician ever got to lead a serious political party is something students of politics will be scratching their heads over for decades.
  • It would have been better had he done so. A good start would have been to demonstrate how much of the European Union of today is a product of British influence, and that in fact we had the uber-federalists on the run, and the opportunities for the future that it offers for our next generations. Probably best he didn't mention Mrs Thatcher's achievement in all of that but he could have done so at the activist level.

    The big challenge for him was given the years of negativity regarding EU for years from the Tory party and the headbanging press the only argument was the one that became labelled "Project Fear" (which I always thought was a bit rich coming from people who used fear of the foreigner as their trump card). It clearly didn't work well enough as "Project Fear of Foreigners" won enough people's emotions
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,032

    I mean yesterday the ERG said they’d abolish all standards for imports/exports but since before the referendum there’d be no weakening of standards.

    Tell me how Dave was supposed to wargame that?

    You can easily replicate the that thought process with a bottle of absinthe and a massive head injury,
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536
    edited September 12
    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,146



    1) I fundamentally disagree with this. Leave had the main great advantage: they didn't have a plan, and therefore could promise whatever anyone who was remotely Eurosceptical wanted. They could tell racist idiots that it would stop all those funny foreigners getting in, and it could tell sane leavers that it would mean minimal changes, all positive (e.g. the EEA route). As we are finding, these promises are incompatible. This is how they won, and it was the great lie at the heart of the referendum. And it's a lie that's biting us in the backside now.

    2) As I've argued in the past, *any* alternative plan would be dismissed by the leavers: and they would need to do so, as collapsing the probability waveforms of what 'Brexit' means would reduce their vote. If leavers can't decide what it means two years after the vote, how could a government impose one - we'd just have got the mess we're in now, with the ERG'ers arguing against it - or the other side arguing against it. These arguments would have helped leave - e.g. "Look, they want a soft Brexit, and those smelly people will still be stealing your jobs!"

    3) The question was binary, but the laziness of leavers before the referendum (a planned one, as it happens) meant that what the result means is uncertain. That is the responsibility of the lazy leavers who have wasted two years.

    4) I'm uncertain about another referendum, but if we end up in a stalemate then it's hard to see another way out of it. God knows what the question should be.

    Personally, I'm veering towards Chequers. It seems the only sane plan on the table.

    I wrote in favour of Chequers when it came out for that reason:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/09/a-better-ole/

    I considered extending the WW1 metaphor for this article by noting that Leavers, by abandoning Chequers, had found themselves trapped in no man's land, but remembered that Leavers get unnaturally excited by references to World Wars.
    To be fair, many leavers - including some on here - are in favour of the Chequers plan. They're being sensible - I think few of them are massively happy with it (or that's the impression I get), but they see it as a workable compromise.

    It's the other camp of leavers who are causing the problems. These people should be nowhere near government or power as they're impractical ideologues IMO.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748

    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.

    What did you expect it to be?
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,239
    If I was TM, i'd be tempted to trigger a NCV myself. She surely has the numbers outside of the ERG to win it.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536
    Roger said:

    Very good header. Your Michelin restaurant metaphor is almost perfect. The most hideous of all Leavers- IDS- yesterday said almost precisely that. "It's not our job to say what kind of Brexit we want that's for the government. We just have to say what we don't want and you can start with Chequers''

    How such an unattractive politician ever got to lead a serious political party is something students of politics will be scratching their heads over for decades.

    have you heard of Jerremy Corbvn ?
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,693
    Mr Eagles,

    May I quote Peter Hennessy (Atlee Professor of Contemporary History) this week?

    "The Cameron Cabinet had expressly forbidden Whitehall departments from preparing any contingency plans for a Brexit ahead of the 2016 referendum. We have been living with the consequences ever since."

    Bullshit, was your erudite answer to it.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,239



    1) I fundamentally disagree with this. Leave had the main great advantage: they didn't have a plan, and therefore could promise whatever anyone who was remotely Eurosceptical wanted. They could tell racist idiots that it would stop all those funny foreigners getting in, and it could tell sane leavers that it would mean minimal changes, all positive (e.g. the EEA route). As we are finding, these promises are incompatible. This is how they won, and it was the great lie at the heart of the referendum. And it's a lie that's biting us in the backside now.

    2) As I've argued in the past, *any* alternative plan would be dismissed by the leavers: and they would need to do so, as collapsing the probability waveforms of what 'Brexit' means would reduce their vote. If leavers can't decide what it means two years after the vote, how could a government impose one - we'd just have got the mess we're in now, with the ERG'ers arguing against it - or the other side arguing against it. These arguments would have helped leave - e.g. "Look, they want a soft Brexit, and those smelly people will still be stealing your jobs!"

    3) The question was binary, but the laziness of leavers before the referendum (a planned one, as it happens) meant that what the result means is uncertain. That is the responsibility of the lazy leavers who have wasted two years.

    4) I'm uncertain about another referendum, but if we end up in a stalemate then it's hard to see another way out of it. God knows what the question should be.

    Personally, I'm veering towards Chequers. It seems the only sane plan on the table.

    I wrote in favour of Chequers when it came out for that reason:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/09/a-better-ole/

    I considered extending the WW1 metaphor for this article by noting that Leavers, by abandoning Chequers, had found themselves trapped in no man's land, but remembered that Leavers get unnaturally excited by references to World Wars.
    To be fair, many leavers - including some on here - are in favour of the Chequers plan. They're being sensible - I think few of them are massively happy with it (or that's the impression I get), but they see it as a workable compromise.

    It's the other camp of leavers who are causing the problems. These people should be nowhere near government or power as they're impractical ideologues IMO.
    Exactly. It's a fudge, but a workable fudge if both sides play ball, and doesn't 'wreck' the economy in a way a No deal would.

    what makes me so angry right now, is the fundamentals of our economy are on good tracks, and we're throwing it all away for unicorns.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350
    Roger said:

    Very good header. Your Michelin restaurant metaphor is almost perfect. The most hideous of all Leavers- IDS- yesterday said almost precisely that. "It's not our job to say what kind of Brexit we want that's for the government. We just have to say what we don't want and you can start with Chequers''

    How such an unattractive politician ever got to lead a serious political party is something students of politics will be scratching their heads over for decades.

  • Roger said:

    Very good header. Your Michelin restaurant metaphor is almost perfect. The most hideous of all Leavers- IDS- yesterday said almost precisely that. "It's not our job to say what kind of Brexit we want that's for the government. We just have to say what we don't want and you can start with Chequers''

    How such an unattractive politician ever got to lead a serious political party is something students of politics will be scratching their heads over for decades.

    He is thick as a plank, which is why he appeals to a certain type of right wing activist, who, not being at the front of the queue in the brains department, think he is some sort of visionary. He is very similar in that regard to Corbyn.

    It might be helpful if all senior politicians were subject to an IQ and EQ test. After all, most important jobs require such testing, so why shouldn't it be so for anyone standing for the most important position in the land?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536
    Sandpit said:

    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.

    What did you expect it to be?
    Personally just that, but I note lots of our remain colleges have been telling me our influence and smart politicians means that ever closer union is off the agenda .
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,499



    Comments taken out of context.

    They began planning but could reconcile the unbelievable promises of Leave and Yes.

    For example Yes said the Bank of England would be an Independent Scotland’s lender of last resort and the FCA/PRU would supervise the Financial Services/Banking sectors, both would have been illegal.

    I was working in the civil service during Sindy and was explicitly told by senior civil servants we were to do no preparations whatsoever and that this was a political decision from No. 10.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 1,231

    Andreas Schleicher, the OECD’s director of education and skills, said too many young people emerging from university were ending up in low-paid, non-graduate jobs in the UK because they lacked the basic numeracy and literacy skills that should be expected from a university education.

    Of the 70% graduates who went to a non-elite university, 28% were doing shift work, 3% were on a zero-hour contract and 17% were underemployed. Among those without a degree, meanwhile, 19% were doing shift work, 2% were on a zero-hour contract and 30% were underemployed.

    “Graduating from non-Russell Group university increases the probability of insecure employment, such as shift work or zero-hours contracts, compared to those without a degree,” said Holcekova.

    Is it because they have poor literacy or numeracy skills or because there simply aren't enough generalist graduate level jobs for half the population?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350
    The ERG are trying to convince the public they have a plan for Brexit, a plan for trade and a plan for NI.

    They don't even have a plan for Tezza
  • I wrote a long critique of the OP but it seems to have vanished from the thread. I assume this is now being edited by Geordie Greig?

    Anyway, good to see the Remainers slapping each others backs in mutual congratulation on missing the point of the referendum. The real news today is the Junker is joining Barnier in trying to get it through Theresa May's thick head that the only thing that the EU want to offer is a Canada Plus FTA. Which is what the Leavers want. That must be a bit awkward.

    Can we have a few more Remainers on here criticising Leavers for refusing to back the 'pragmatic compromise' of Chequers, despite the fact that the EU have completely ruled it out? Or maybe it is time to accept after all that the referendum was a binary question - fully in or fully out - and that you lost?
  • I mean yesterday the ERG said they’d abolish all standards for imports/exports but since before the referendum there’d be no weakening of standards.

    Tell me how Dave was supposed to wargame that?

    by saying what he would do, it would force the opposition to respond
    But Leavers would have only ressponded by accusing him of misusing the civil service/govt.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,499

    I mean yesterday the ERG said they’d abolish all standards for imports/exports but since before the referendum there’d be no weakening of standards.

    Tell me how Dave was supposed to wargame that?

    It's not about wargaming, it's about preliminary preparation like when the PM turns up on day 1 post referendum result you can give him (and Cameron did promise to stay after all) a list of decisions and trade-offs he needs to make, rather than spending the next X months working out what the key issues are, and boxing yourself into red lines that turn out to be problematic.

    As an example, witness the confusion about Euratom.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748

    Sandpit said:

    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.

    What did you expect it to be?
    Personally just that, but I note lots of our remain colleges have been telling me our influence and smart politicians means that ever closer union is off the agenda .
    Ever closer union has not been off the table since the Treaty of Rome was signed in 1957. The fact that the EU is a ratchet was a factor in many a Leave vote, mine included. They have every intention of being a United States of Europe, only without the democratic accountability seen in the USA.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350
    rkrkrk said:

    As an example, witness the confusion about Euratom.

    If Cameron had proposed leaving Euratom before the vote, Brexiteers would have accused him of scaremongering
  • Sandpit said:

    CD13 said:

    Can we have some clarity in these perpetual moans from Remainers …

    (1) Remain had all then advantages during the referendum. The government, TV, especially the BBC (with the exception of the three week purdah period), and the money that was spent.

    (2) The lack of preparation and plan was down to one man. David Cameron. He prevented the civil service working on alternative plans - something they would automatically have done. Yet somehow it's all Brexit's fault. I had no ready-made plan in my pocket, and neither had Labour,for exactly the same reason. We're not in charge of the civil service. This isn't rocket science, but why hasn't Cameron been widely castigated for this cock-up?

    (3) After a binary referendum, the idea of appealing to the Remainers by accepting many of their policies is akin to Labour winning a GE and taking on much of the Tory manifesto. Why?

    (4) The country is split. Another referendum, and possibly another after that until we get the 'right' answer won't solve that.


    Two is such bullshit.

    He asked for prep to be done but the civil service couldn’t reconcile the contradictions in the Leave campaigns.

    Such as we’re leaving the single market but no one is threatening our place in the single market.
    Cameron called the referendum. He could, and should, have had the country vote on a specific vision of Brexit.
    That was indeed the biggest mistake.

    A referendum works when the government are proposing something specific and are asking for approval. It doesn’t work when the government support the status quo and allows something non-specific as an alternative.

    The correct approach would have been to have the referendum as EU membership vs EEA membership, we could have debated the pros and cons of both organisations before the vote. Those in favour of WTO or similar would mostly have supported EEU as a loosening of the relationship on the way to the preferred destination.
    If he had done that the EEA option would have won by a mile - and the establishment had no intention whatsoever of leaving the EU.. The reason Dave called the in/out referendum is that he assumed he was bound to win.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,146

    I wrote a long critique of the OP but it seems to have vanished from the thread. I assume this is now being edited by Geordie Greig?

    Anyway, good to see the Remainers slapping each others backs in mutual congratulation on missing the point of the referendum. The real news today is the Junker is joining Barnier in trying to get it through Theresa May's thick head that the only thing that the EU want to offer is a Canada Plus FTA. Which is what the Leavers want. That must be a bit awkward.

    Can we have a few more Remainers on here criticising Leavers for refusing to back the 'pragmatic compromise' of Chequers, despite the fact that the EU have completely ruled it out? Or maybe it is time to accept after all that the referendum was a binary question - fully in or fully out - and that you lost?

    "Or maybe it is time to accept after all that the referendum was a binary question - fully in or fully out"

    No, it wasn't.

    Did you vote in the referendum?
  • If I was TM, i'd be tempted to trigger a NCV myself. She surely has the numbers outside of the ERG to win it.

    No and that is how you know this is all spin and mind games. Theresa May would almost certainly lose a confidence vote which is why she (or her proxies) won't call one. The Brexiteers would almost certainly lose the leadership election that followed, which is why they won't put the letters in.
  • Sandpit said:

    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.

    What did you expect it to be?
    Personally just that, but I note lots of our remain colleges have been telling me our influence and smart politicians means that ever closer union is off the agenda .
    Once again Mr Alanbrooke you either intentionally or unintentionally misunderstand Europe. Ever closer union is a bullshit phrase. It has no beginning and no end and is open to massive interpretation. There are those that want a super-state, there are many many that do not. It will only happen if the heads of government (the Council of Ministers) from members agree it to be so.

    Yes, qualified majority voting and all that, but there really is no concrete evidence of a serious prospect of a super-state with sovereignty. The Eu will continue to be a supra-national organisation only. Sorry to shatter your enjoyment of your negative outlook.
  • Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.

    What did you expect it to be?
    Personally just that, but I note lots of our remain colleges have been telling me our influence and smart politicians means that ever closer union is off the agenda .
    Ever closer union has not been off the table since the Treaty of Rome was signed in 1957. The fact that the EU is a ratchet was a factor in many a Leave vote, mine included. They have every intention of being a United States of Europe, only without the democratic accountability seen in the USA.
    Wrong. Those that in favour of such are the equivalent of our ERG. They are headbangers and were very much in decline. If this was the reason for your vote, you, like many others were massively mislead
  • brendan16 said:

    Andreas Schleicher, the OECD’s director of education and skills, said too many young people emerging from university were ending up in low-paid, non-graduate jobs in the UK because they lacked the basic numeracy and literacy skills that should be expected from a university education.

    Of the 70% graduates who went to a non-elite university, 28% were doing shift work, 3% were on a zero-hour contract and 17% were underemployed. Among those without a degree, meanwhile, 19% were doing shift work, 2% were on a zero-hour contract and 30% were underemployed.

    “Graduating from non-Russell Group university increases the probability of insecure employment, such as shift work or zero-hours contracts, compared to those without a degree,” said Holcekova.

    Is it because they have poor literacy or numeracy skills or because there simply aren't enough generalist graduate level jobs for half the population?
    I'm working as a buyer in construction. The amount of jobs that you see advertised that says 'requires degree' is a joke.
    Can you talk to people, raise an order on SAP and progress chase it through the system to delivery.
    The hardest part of the job is finding out from site what the devil they actually want.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 17,536

    Sandpit said:

    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.

    What did you expect it to be?
    Personally just that, but I note lots of our remain colleges have been telling me our influence and smart politicians means that ever closer union is off the agenda .
    Once again Mr Alanbrooke you either intentionally or unintentionally misunderstand Europe. Ever closer union is a bullshit phrase. It has no beginning and no end and is open to massive interpretation. There are those that want a super-state, there are many many that do not. It will only happen if the heads of government (the Council of Ministers) from members agree it to be so.

    Yes, qualified majority voting and all that, but there really is no concrete evidence of a serious prospect of a super-state with sovereignty. The Eu will continue to be a supra-national organisation only. Sorry to shatter your enjoyment of your negative outlook.
    My position is quite conisitent I believe what European politicians have been saying for the last 60 years and what they have delivered in that timeframe. The direction of travel is clear.

    UK politicans hiding behind nonsense like influence and denying the facts dont convince.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 1,231
    Scott_P said:

    Roger said:

    Very good header. Your Michelin restaurant metaphor is almost perfect. The most hideous of all Leavers- IDS- yesterday said almost precisely that. "It's not our job to say what kind of Brexit we want that's for the government. We just have to say what we don't want and you can start with Chequers''

    How such an unattractive politician ever got to lead a serious political party is something students of politics will be scratching their heads over for decades.

    Isn't that also essentially the position of official opposition?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748



    1) I fundamentally disagree with this. Leave had the main great advantage: they didn't have a plan, and therefore could promise whatever anyone who was remotely Eurosceptical wanted. They could tell racist idiots that it would stop all those funny foreigners getting in, and it could tell sane leavers that it would mean minimal changes, all positive (e.g. the EEA route). As we are finding, these promises are incompatible. This is how they won, and it was the great lie at the heart of the referendum. And it's a lie that's biting us in the backside now.

    2) As I've argued in the past, *any* alternative plan would be dismissed by the leavers: and they would need to do so, as collapsing the probability waveforms of what 'Brexit' means would reduce their vote. If leavers can't decide what it means two years after the vote, how could a government impose one - we'd just have got the mess we're in now, with the ERG'ers arguing against it - or the other side arguing against it. These arguments would have helped leave - e.g. "Look, they want a soft Brexit, and those smelly people will still be stealing your jobs!"

    3) The question was binary, but the laziness of leavers before the referendum (a planned one, as it happens) meant that what the result means is uncertain. That is the responsibility of the lazy leavers who have wasted two years.

    4) I'm uncertain about another referendum, but if we end up in a stalemate then it's hard to see another way out of it. God knows what the question should be.

    Personally, I'm veering towards Chequers. It seems the only sane plan on the table.

    I wrote in favour of Chequers when it came out for that reason:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/09/a-better-ole/

    I considered extending the WW1 metaphor for this article by noting that Leavers, by abandoning Chequers, had found themselves trapped in no man's land, but remembered that Leavers get unnaturally excited by references to World Wars.
    To be fair, many leavers - including some on here - are in favour of the Chequers plan. They're being sensible - I think few of them are massively happy with it (or that's the impression I get), but they see it as a workable compromise.

    It's the other camp of leavers who are causing the problems. These people should be nowhere near government or power as they're impractical ideologues IMO.
    Absolutely. There’s plenty of pragmatic Leavers around, including people like Michael Gove and Dan Hannan that a lot of commentators would have categorised as extreme, but are actually in favour of a gradual disentanglement of which Chequers is a good compromise.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,374

    Sandpit said:

    So junckers proposals to EU Parlt is lots more Europe.

    What did you expect it to be?
    Personally just that, but I note lots of our remain colleges have been telling me our influence and smart politicians means that ever closer union is off the agenda .
    Once again Mr Alanbrooke you either intentionally or unintentionally misunderstand Europe. Ever closer union is a bullshit phrase. It has no beginning and no end and is open to massive interpretation. There are those that want a super-state, there are many many that do not. It will only happen if the heads of government (the Council of Ministers) from members agree it to be so.

    Yes, qualified majority voting and all that, but there really is no concrete evidence of a serious prospect of a super-state with sovereignty. The Eu will continue to be a supra-national organisation only. Sorry to shatter your enjoyment of your negative outlook.
    My position is quite conisitent I believe what European politicians have been saying for the last 60 years and what they have delivered in that timeframe. The direction of travel is clear.

    UK politicans hiding behind nonsense like influence and denying the facts dont convince.
    I'm happy to say that I'm in favour of a European super-state (provided they don't use AV) and I would have thought that a country like the UK, which has managed to preserve separate legal systems in Scotland and England for example, would be a country that could understand that you could forge a union between different countries that wasn't solely about one country lording it over the others.

    Sadly my fellow Brits disagree.
  • I wrote a long critique of the OP but it seems to have vanished from the thread. I assume this is now being edited by Geordie Greig?

    Anyway, good to see the Remainers slapping each others backs in mutual congratulation on missing the point of the referendum. The real news today is the Junker is joining Barnier in trying to get it through Theresa May's thick head that the only thing that the EU want to offer is a Canada Plus FTA. Which is what the Leavers want. That must be a bit awkward.

    Can we have a few more Remainers on here criticising Leavers for refusing to back the 'pragmatic compromise' of Chequers, despite the fact that the EU have completely ruled it out? Or maybe it is time to accept after all that the referendum was a binary question - fully in or fully out - and that you lost?

    "Or maybe it is time to accept after all that the referendum was a binary question - fully in or fully out"

    No, it wasn't.

    Did you vote in the referendum?
    Somebody else thinks so....

    Junker: “[We] ask the British government to understand that someone who leaves the Union cannot be in the same privileged position as a member state. If you leave the Union, you are of course no longer part of our single market, and certainly not only in the parts of it you choose,” said Juncker, referring to the U.K. proposal that it remain within the single market for goods but not services. "...We agree with the statement made in Chequers that the starting point for such a partnership should be a free-trade area between the United Kingdom and the European Union,” he said.
This discussion has been closed.