OK, Mr Ampfield, let me explain in simple enough terms . 1) N Ireland.Without the Brexit madness there is no argument over hard borders etc. in N Ireland. If there does end up being a hard border this will very likely result in chaos for N Irish trade and possibly a breakdown in the Good Friday agreement and ultimately a more likely united Ireland. Some may argue this is no bad thing, but the instability and violence certainly would be. 2) Scotland. It does not take a genius to work out that Brexit makes Scots more likely to swing behind the Scottish Nationalists. Even the average Brexit enthusiast should be able to work that one out. Neither of these scenarios would be likely without Brexit, so hence why I say if UK of GB and N Ireland breaks up, then the thicky Brexiteers own it 100%. Some patriots eh? Fifth Columners/Putin useful idiots more like!
Mr. 86, that's true, although lots of coverage time is down to whether there are cameras on location or not. It's one reason (though far from the only one) why a hurricane in the US tends to get more coverage than when it's blowing through Haiti.
I am just not sure she is competent. At some point you need to accept she is not a good leader. The economic news is really bad today. Retail is dying and exports are struggling especially outside Europe. May be hard to avoid a recession
its the same across the world, this isnt just a UK issue
The global demand picture is worsening.
But we have a few specific negatives, in particular our reliance on consumer spending, and very low household savings rates. The fear for the UK is that falling house prices results in falling consumer confidence, and therefore rising household savings rates and lower retail sales.*
The risk is that we enter into a negative feedback loop, where falling confidence leads to ever higher savings rates.
The irony is that this problem is essentially nothing to do with Brexit.
* All those headlines are from today.
You seem to have household savings rates as both a good and bad thing. Surely the question is whether household spending (ie not saving) fuels the domestic economy more or less than it sucks in imports?
If we borrow money from Singaporeans to import an iPhone, it boosts GDP. That is the nature of a consumption driven economy.
Our household savings rates are too low, which is to a large extent the result of the New Labour years, when subsidies on savings (PEPs, TESSAS to ISAs) were reduced.
In the long run, we need a (through the cycle) household savings rate of perhaps 10-12%. We're currently at less than half that level. If our savings rate were to go from 4% to 14%, that effectively means losing more than 10% of Final Consumption Expenditure, which would be a large drop in GDP (and would only be somewhat cushioned by a declining current account deficit).
Something very significant happened this weekend, and I'm surprised more hasn't been made of this, although Sam Gyimah has, on Twitter.
This weekend, at first imperceptibly, and then at a torrent, the narrative coming from inside number 10 shifted.
Nobody is trying to sell May's deal any more. They've given up. The phony war is over, and everyone is now preparing for not *if*, but *when* the Meaningful Vote fails.
You have to bear May's comments in that light. She has finally accepted, as has cabinet, and the bunker, that her deal is dead. Everyone is positioning themselves for the coming constitutional crisis.
If Cabinet and Number 10 bounce the government into a second referendum, it will be a final personal and political humiliation for May. So what she's doing is her positioning herself so she has a path to a diginifed, honourable resignation.
If/when cabinet decides a 2nd ref is the best way forward, May has already laid the groundwork for bowing out gracefully.
I am just not sure she is competent. At some point you need to accept she is not a good leader. The economic news is really bad today. Retail is dying and exports are struggling especially outside Europe. May be hard to avoid a recession
its the same across the world, this isnt just a UK issue
No it isn't. That is complacent %%&*(%$
The UK has had a collapse in investment. Not only will the recession be worse than our competitors, the recovery when it eventually comes will be very slow and shallow. The weakness of Sterling not withstanding, the long run business model of using "equity" from housing to buy other peoples products is finally running out of road. So prolonged house price weakness on top of everything else. You may have thought the past ten years were a bit tricky. Unless we get rid of the bullshit and focus on the reality of what is about to happen, the next ten years will definitively knock the UK economy out of the top ten global economies. JLR job losses presage a wholesale shift of manufacturing away from the non EU UK. Project Fear? Not scary enough.
Mr. Cocque, interesting theory. Can't recall precisely but one year market for her departure shortened a little on Ladbrokes when I checked this morning.
You've repeatedly claimed that the problem was that May was a remainer, and that a leaver would have done much better. Are you altering that position?
And the points are not straw men: they're critically relevant to the question of whether a leaver (or indeed anyone) could have got a 'better' deal.
You are also talking with hindsight, which is a wonderful thing. There was also f'all chance of the people you mention being put in charge of negotiations - and you knew that before the referendum. You were more likely to get (say) IDS or Boris doing the negotiating - do you think they'd have done better?
Brexit has been proved to be horribly difficult and messy. Some of us were saying that it would be so before the referendum. I understand why you want to think it needn't have been so, but you seem to have precious little evidence for it aside from some perverse faith in the skills of Brexiteers; a faith that goes against all available evidence.
Your claim of talking with hindsight might have some validity if we had not raised these specific issues at the time. But since we (both Leavers and Remainers) did, repeatedly on here, your point has no validity whatsoever.
It is you who are wilfully ignoring the evidence because it is inconvenient for your claims that this was all doomed from the start.
I am just not sure she is competent. At some point you need to accept she is not a good leader. The economic news is really bad today. Retail is dying and exports are struggling especially outside Europe. May be hard to avoid a recession
its the same across the world, this isnt just a UK issue
No it isn't. That is complacent %%&*(%$
The UK has had a collapse in investment. Not only will the recession be worse than our competitors, the recovery when it eventually comes will be very slow and shallow. The weakness of Sterling not withstanding, the long run business model of using "equity" from housing to buy other peoples products is finally running out of road. So prolonged house price weakness on top of everything else. You may have thought the past ten years were a bit tricky. Unless we get rid of the bullshit and focus on the reality of what is about to happen, the next ten years will definitively knock the UK economy out of the top ten global economies. JLR job losses presage a wholesale shift of manufacturing away from the non EU UK. Project Fear? Not scary enough.
On top of which the boost from the significant devaluation in our currency is remarkable for having been so anaemic against any compatable
Mr. Cocque, interesting theory. Can't recall precisely but one year market for her departure shortened a little on Ladbrokes when I checked this morning.
To give May some credit (I do this so rarely, enjoy it), she's preparing to do a resignation properly. Making it clear there is a red line that she cannot possibly cross, but until that line is crossed, she's gonna damn well work her ass off to prevent it.
She's making a point of ensuring that when she resigns, it will be with dignity and a certain amount of grudging respect from her opponents; the absolute opposite way from the arrogant poshboy you-clean-up-my-mess-for-me-peasant flounce that Cameron executed.
Something very significant happened this weekend, and I'm surprised more hasn't been made of this, although Sam Gyimah has, on Twitter.
This weekend, at first imperceptibly, and then at a torrent, the narrative coming from inside number 10 shifted.
Nobody is trying to sell May's deal any more. They've given up. The phony war is over, and everyone is now preparing for not *if*, but *when* the Meaningful Vote fails.
You have to bear May's comments in that light. She has finally accepted, as has cabinet, and the bunker, that her deal is dead. Everyone is positioning themselves for the coming constitutional crisis.
If Cabinet and Number 10 bounce the government into a second referendum, it will be a final personal and political humiliation for May. So what she's doing is her positioning herself so she has a path to a diginifed, honourable resignation.
If/when cabinet decides a 2nd ref is the best way forward, May has already laid the groundwork for bowing out gracefully.
Its not the best way forward... it would be a disaster
I wonder if Philip May will request the portrait as a gift for his wife.
I like the portrait, but I don't think the background conveys a flattering message for the Prime Minister.
Oh I know, but given I imagine May knows that background is a real issue, and given the positive sentiment from OGH, I think perhaps it might still be suitable.
Something very significant happened this weekend, and I'm surprised more hasn't been made of this, although Sam Gyimah has, on Twitter.
This weekend, at first imperceptibly, and then at a torrent, the narrative coming from inside number 10 shifted.
Nobody is trying to sell May's deal any more. They've given up. The phony war is over, and everyone is now preparing for not *if*, but *when* the Meaningful Vote fails.
You have to bear May's comments in that light. She has finally accepted, as has cabinet, and the bunker, that her deal is dead. Everyone is positioning themselves for the coming constitutional crisis.
If Cabinet and Number 10 bounce the government into a second referendum, it will be a final personal and political humiliation for May. So what she's doing is her positioning herself so she has a path to a diginifed, honourable resignation.
If/when cabinet decides a 2nd ref is the best way forward, May has already laid the groundwork for bowing out gracefully.
Its not the best way forward... it would be a disaster
It's not even a decision. It's a way for MPs (salary: £77k) to wash their hands of making a decision.
I wonder if Philip May will request the portrait as a gift for his wife.
I like the portrait, but I don't think the background conveys a flattering message for the Prime Minister.
Oh I know, but given I imagine May knows that background is a real issue, and given the positive sentiment from OGH, I think perhaps it might still be suitable.
You mean the human beings plummeting to hades all around her?
Everytime I think May is actually pretty good or at least best of the bunch she messes up - but then whenever I start thinking she's no good and must go she shows herself to be quite impressive.
I'm not a fan of hers at all but I do think her tactics make sense. She knows that if we are to leave the EU on 29/3 it can only be on the basis of the WA. So do nothing and wait for that reality to dawn upon sufficient of the pontificators and special pleaders. Put up or shut up, basically.
Will it work? Perhaps not. Perhaps even probably not. Much depends on Labour. But I think there is a greater chance that it will than seems to be the consensus. Certainly I think that this widespread 'the deal is dead as a dodo' sentiment is premature. A lot of it, please note, is coming from the extreme leave and remain factions, both of whom desperately WANT the deal to be off the table so that their preferred No Deal or No Brexit can prevail.
Mr. Cocque, interesting theory. Can't recall precisely but one year market for her departure shortened a little on Ladbrokes when I checked this morning.
To give May some credit (I do this so rarely, enjoy it), she's preparing to do a resignation properly. Making it clear there is a red line that she cannot possibly cross, but until that line is crossed, she's gonna damn well work her ass off to prevent it.
She's making a point of ensuring that when she resigns, it will be with dignity and a certain amount of grudging respect from her opponents; the absolute opposite way from the arrogant poshboy you-clean-up-my-mess-for-me-peasant flounce that Cameron executed.
That seems plausible, but the other alternative is that she's locked in a Mexican standoff with certain individuals about who will be first to crack and support a second referendum. May wins this game by using brinkmanship to force their hand and she needs one of the following to jump first: Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Penny Mordaunt, David Davis, Liam Fox, Dominic Raab, and finally, Jeremy Corbyn.
Opposition to a second referendum can be seen as a psychological weapon she's wielding against the Brexiteers, with the message, "I'm not going to be the one to bail you out."
If May's deal is dead, then surely the only alternatives are crashing out on 29th March with no deal, which pretty well everyone agrees will be nasty*, or 'pulling' the Article 50 letter.
* Some people think it will be temporarily unpleasant, some that the unpleasantness wil llast for quite a while and some people think it will be totally disastrous. I've read nothing anywhere that suggests everything will be OK, although some suggest it will be a non-event like Y2k, although the possibility of disaster then was carefully planned for.
And I don't understand why anyone admires the pig-headed, obdurate and cruel Mrs May.
I think May can form a Gov't if she pivots to exiting without a deal. Jeremy Hunt is very obviously a candidate for Chancellor in that scenario. I wouldn't be surprised if hypothetical (And it is hypothetical due to the 12 month rule) non payroll confidence votes against/for May completely flip in the coming months.
Everytime I think May is actually pretty good or at least best of the bunch she messes up - but then whenever I start thinking she's no good and must go she shows herself to be quite impressive.
I'm not a fan of hers at all but I do think her tactics make sense. She knows that if we are to leave the EU on 29/3 it can only be on the basis of the WA. So do nothing and wait for that reality to dawn upon sufficient of the pontificators and special pleaders. Put up or shut up, basically.
The only way we can leave the EU on any other terms than the WA is either a chaotic no-deal (which the electorate voted for) or the EU has to agree an extension of A50 to renegotiate (they won't).
However, as May is belatedly realising, that's just making the argument for remain stronger for a lot of people.
If May's deal is dead, then surely the only alternatives are crashing out on 29th March with no deal, which pretty well everyone agrees will be nasty*, or 'pulling' the Article 50 letter.
* Some people think it will be temporarily unpleasant, some that the unpleasantness wil llast for quite a while and some people think it will be totally disastrous. I've read nothing anywhere that suggests everything will be OK, although some suggest it will be a non-event like Y2k, although the possibility of disaster then was carefully planned for.
And I don't understand why anyone admires the pig-headed, obdurate and cruel Mrs May.
David Davis says no deal will be okay. But he also thinks there will be a transition period if there's no deal.
David Davis is a weapons-grade bellpiece and you should not listen to him.
Something very significant happened this weekend, and I'm surprised more hasn't been made of this, although Sam Gyimah has, on Twitter.
This weekend, at first imperceptibly, and then at a torrent, the narrative coming from inside number 10 shifted.
Nobody is trying to sell May's deal any more. They've given up. The phony war is over, and everyone is now preparing for not *if*, but *when* the Meaningful Vote fails.
You have to bear May's comments in that light. She has finally accepted, as has cabinet, and the bunker, that her deal is dead. Everyone is positioning themselves for the coming constitutional crisis.
If Cabinet and Number 10 bounce the government into a second referendum, it will be a final personal and political humiliation for May. So what she's doing is her positioning herself so she has a path to a diginifed, honourable resignation.
If/when cabinet decides a 2nd ref is the best way forward, May has already laid the groundwork for bowing out gracefully.
Its not the best way forward... it would be a disaster
That might not be the contradiction you think it is.
Something very significant happened this weekend, and I'm surprised more hasn't been made of this, although Sam Gyimah has, on Twitter.
This weekend, at first imperceptibly, and then at a torrent, the narrative coming from inside number 10 shifted.
Nobody is trying to sell May's deal any more. They've given up. The phony war is over, and everyone is now preparing for not *if*, but *when* the Meaningful Vote fails.
You have to bear May's comments in that light. She has finally accepted, as has cabinet, and the bunker, that her deal is dead. Everyone is positioning themselves for the coming constitutional crisis.
If Cabinet and Number 10 bounce the government into a second referendum, it will be a final personal and political humiliation for May. So what she's doing is her positioning herself so she has a path to a diginifed, honourable resignation.
If/when cabinet decides a 2nd ref is the best way forward, May has already laid the groundwork for bowing out gracefully.
Its not the best way forward... it would be a disaster
That might not be the contradiction you think it is.
One way or another pretty much every route out of this mess potentially leads to disaster.
Something very significant happened this weekend, and I'm surprised more hasn't been made of this, although Sam Gyimah has, on Twitter.
This weekend, at first imperceptibly, and then at a torrent, the narrative coming from inside number 10 shifted.
Nobody is trying to sell May's deal any more. They've given up. The phony war is over, and everyone is now preparing for not *if*, but *when* the Meaningful Vote fails.
You have to bear May's comments in that light. She has finally accepted, as has cabinet, and the bunker, that her deal is dead. Everyone is positioning themselves for the coming constitutional crisis.
If Cabinet and Number 10 bounce the government into a second referendum, it will be a final personal and political humiliation for May. So what she's doing is her positioning herself so she has a path to a diginifed, honourable resignation.
If/when cabinet decides a 2nd ref is the best way forward, May has already laid the groundwork for bowing out gracefully.
Its not the best way forward... it would be a disaster
That might not be the contradiction you think it is.
One way or another pretty much every route out of this mess potentially leads to disaster.
But Parliament has to choose.
And yet Parliament is showing no desire to choose.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
I agree that such a question could potentially clear the triple lock of Parliament/Electoral Commission/European Council.
But how the government enacts this without the Tories fracturing permanently eludes me.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
Can such a motion be tabled through a backbench bill ?
I seriously doubt it, but I imagine if May resigns someone like Hague will be wheeled out temporarily to push it through with the help of Labour MPs.
I'm not sure she'll resign if we're heading to leaving without a deal. I honestly doubt the remainers (Push/shove time) amongst the 200 MPs expressing confidence in her in the recent Tory election properly thought through their action.
I think May can form a Gov't if she pivots to exiting without a deal. Jeremy Hunt is very obviously a candidate for Chancellor in that scenario. I wouldn't be surprised if hypothetical (And it is hypothetical due to the 12 month rule) non payroll confidence votes against/for May completely flip in the coming months.
Mr. Cocque, interesting theory. Can't recall precisely but one year market for her departure shortened a little on Ladbrokes when I checked this morning.
To give May some credit (I do this so rarely, enjoy it), she's preparing to do a resignation properly. Making it clear there is a red line that she cannot possibly cross, but until that line is crossed, she's gonna damn well work her ass off to prevent it.
She's making a point of ensuring that when she resigns, it will be with dignity and a certain amount of grudging respect from her opponents; the absolute opposite way from the arrogant poshboy you-clean-up-my-mess-for-me-peasant flounce that Cameron executed.
That was what I said this morning. She knows she is counting the days, and resigning on a point of principle is hugely better for her and her legacy than being turfed out by parliament or even her colleagues
You've repeatedly claimed that the problem was that May was a remainer, and that a leaver would have done much better. Are you altering that position?
And the points are not straw men: they're critically relevant to the question of whether a leaver (or indeed anyone) could have got a 'better' deal.
You are also talking with hindsight, which is a wonderful thing. There was also f'all chance of the people you mention being put in charge of negotiations - and you knew that before the referendum. You were more likely to get (say) IDS or Boris doing the negotiating - do you think they'd have done better?
Brexit has been proved to be horribly difficult and messy. Some of us were saying that it would be so before the referendum. I understand why you want to think it needn't have been so, but you seem to have precious little evidence for it aside from some perverse faith in the skills of Brexiteers; a faith that goes against all available evidence.
Your claim of talking with hindsight might have some validity if we had not raised these specific issues at the time. But since we (both Leavers and Remainers) did, repeatedly on here, your point has no validity whatsoever.
It is you who are wilfully ignoring the evidence because it is inconvenient for your claims that this was all doomed from the start.
Nope, still hindsight. Especially as many of those people have been negative ninnies about everything to do with any potential deal throughout the process. Little boys who cried wolf: often because they, whether leaver or remainer, clearly didn't want a deal.
I'm also not ignoring evidence: unless you're confusing your opinions with 'evidence'. I may be putting different weight on 'evidence', but that's fair enough.
I am not claiming it was doomed from the start: just that it was nowhere near the slam-dunk many Brexiteers stupidly said it would be. I'm also rather dubious of any claim that there were not other pitfalls that May, or any notional negotiator, might have fallen into if other choices had been made.
This is especially true as you seem to think leavers could have done a better job. I find this an absolutely ludicrous assertion given their lack of skills and, in many cases, febrile hatred of the EU and lack of knowledge about it and our relationship shown by most Conservative leaver politicians.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
Cancel then a confirmatory referendum seems a possible outcome. The markets before the deadline will be pretty ugly, so I'd have thought such a vote wouldn't be at all close.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That is also my expectation. A50 will be revoked and the question of whether this will be temporary or permanent will be left open. But the reality is that it will be permanent.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
Do we know if we can revoke if Article 50 is extended beyond March 29th.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
Do we know if we can revoke if Article 50 is extended beyond March 29th.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
Do we know if we can revoke if Article 50 is extended beyond March 29th.
Unless article 50 is somehow altered by both sides then an extension only changes the time it ends, the terms of article 50 stay the same.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That would be a bit of a farce though without the no deal option. I can't see it happening.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
I agree that such a question could potentially clear the triple lock of Parliament/Electoral Commission/European Council.
But how the government enacts this without the Tories fracturing permanently eludes me.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That is also my expectation. A50 will be revoked and the question of whether this will be temporary or permanent will be left open. But the reality is that it will be permanent.
Arguably (to say the least) Remain should not be on the ballot. The choices should be two leave options.
I suggested Norway vs No Deal the other day (with some tinkering around CU issues).
Doubt this will happen though.
I worry a great deal about the political turmoil that putting Remain on the ballot will cause.
Signs of desperation from the Brexit loons. They have already given Ms Sturgeon masses of reasons to go for another independence referendum. She won't go for it though, unless she thinks she has a decent chance of winning. She is probably praying for a hard Brexit.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
I agree that such a question could potentially clear the triple lock of Parliament/Electoral Commission/European Council.
But how the government enacts this without the Tories fracturing permanently eludes me.
All outcomes lead to the Tories fracturing permanently. Crashing out with No Deal has the added kicker that, as well as fracturing, both sides of the fracture will be blamed for a generation for the biggest self-inflicted disaster the UK has known in a 100 years.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That would be a bit of a farce though without the no deal option. I can't see it happening.
Our politicians may not be that bright, but they wili have learrned not to put damaging ill-defined propositions to a vote
I am just not sure she is competent. At some point you need to accept she is not a good leader. The economic news is really bad today. Retail is dying and exports are struggling especially outside Europe. May be hard to avoid a recession
its the same across the world, this isnt just a UK issue
No it isn't. That is complacent %%&*(%$
The UK has had a collapse in investment. Not only will the recession be worse than our competitors, the recovery when it eventually comes will be very slow and shallow. The weakness of Sterling not withstanding, the long run business model of using "equity" from housing to buy other peoples products is finally running out of road. So prolonged house price weakness on top of everything else. You may have thought the past ten years were a bit tricky. Unless we get rid of the bullshit and focus on the reality of what is about to happen, the next ten years will definitively knock the UK economy out of the top ten global economies. JLR job losses presage a wholesale shift of manufacturing away from the non EU UK. Project Fear? Not scary enough.
Can you tell us more about this collapse in investement?
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That would be a bit of a farce though without the no deal option. I can't see it happening.
But no deal is literally no deal; better for a party to articulate a coherent leaving strategy over the next few years, surely, on that basis?
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
Without the intention to serve article 50 again, you would be lighting a touchpaper.
Another vague but ominious threat of violence from you?
Tut tut.
They will be taking to the barricades in their hundreds in their bath-chairs I tell you... we had better watch out! Additionally, the Daily Express will be overwhelmed with illegible scribblings - it will be hell.
If parliament rejects May's deal by 420 - 220 (or thereabouts), why on earth should the very same deal then be put to a public referendum?
Likewise if Leave with No Deal is soundly rejected by parliament.
In electoral terms, it would be a case of "Reopen nominations", as none of the Brexit candidates so far presented are acceptable.
The only Brexit that has a chance of getting through parliament is a deal that Labour can sign on to. With most of Labour, half of the Tories and the DUP you have a parliamentary majority. That is the only way I can see a deal being agreed.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That would be a bit of a farce though without the no deal option. I can't see it happening.
But no deal is literally no deal; better for a party to articulate a coherent leaving strategy over the next few years, surely, on that basis?
Yes it would be best to cancel A50 then start to prepare to leave all over again. Nothing else makes sense.
But I suspect once A50 is cancelled that will be the end of it.
The only way we can leave the EU on any other terms than the WA is either a chaotic no-deal (which the electorate voted for) or the EU has to agree an extension of A50 to renegotiate (they won't).
Right. That article 50 extension comes only with EUref2, which is as toxic as No Deal. So all you need to do is retain sufficient faith in our politicians to not believe that they will sanction either of those horrors and voila the WA somehow goes through. This is the ledge on which I am standing as the waters rise. And I'm staying put for now. It is a very low bar, that parliament not do something stupid and borderline sadistic, and I think that after much huffing and puffing it can scrape over it.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
What is wrong with a choice between Leave on the basis of the WA or Remain on current terms?
Meanwhile I see that it is all kicking off again in France and Belgium in relation to the Marrakech Declaration our own @Alanbrooke wrote about recently.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That would be a bit of a farce though without the no deal option. I can't see it happening.
Just what part of the last 2-3 years has made you believe anyone has the slightest interest in avoiding farce?
La farce, c'est le mot juste du jour, and many jours to come.
You've repeatedly claimed that the problem was that May was a remainer, and that a leaver would have done much better. Are you altering that position?
And the points are not straw men: they're critically relevant to the question of whether a leaver (or indeed anyone) could have got a 'better' deal.
You are also talking with hindsight, which is a wonderful thing. There was also f'all chance of the people you mention being put in charge of negotiations - and you knew that before the referendum. You were more likely to get (say) IDS or Boris doing the negotiating - do you think they'd have done better?
Brexit has been proved to be horribly difficult and messy. Some of us were saying that it would be so before the referendum. I understand why you want to think it needn't have been so, but you seem to have precious little evidence for it aside from some perverse faith in the skills of Brexiteers; a faith that goes against all available evidence.
Your claim of talking with hindsight might have some validity if we had not raised these specific issues at the time. But since we (both Leavers and Remainers) did, repeatedly on here, your point has no validity whatsoever.
It is you who are wilfully ignoring the evidence because it is inconvenient for your claims that this was all doomed from the start.
Nope, still hindsight. Especially as many of those people have been negative ninnies about everything to do with any potential deal throughout the process. Little boys who cried wolf: often because they, whether leaver or remainer, clearly didn't want a deal.
I'm also not ignoring evidence: unless you're confusing your opinions with 'evidence'. I may be putting different weight on 'evidence', but that's fair enough.
I am not claiming it was doomed from the start: just that it was nowhere near the slam-dunk many Brexiteers stupidly said it would be. I'm also rather dubious of any claim that there were not other pitfalls that May, or any notional negotiator, might have fallen into if other choices had been made.
This is especially true as you seem to think leavers could have done a better job. I find this an absolutely ludicrous assertion given their lack of skills and, in many cases, febrile hatred of the EU and lack of knowledge about it and our relationship shown by most Conservative leaver politicians.
I have not noticed either Gove or Cox exhibiting febrile hatred. I am afraid you are allowing your own clear bias - perhaps your own febrile hatred of Brexit - to cloud your judgement.
And there were plenty of sensible posters on both sides of the debate who pointed out the same May mistakes I mentioned. You just want to paint all those people who disagree with you as holding views which are invalid.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That would be a bit of a farce though without the no deal option. I can't see it happening.
We are way past the point where non-farcical options are available.
There's no point putting No Deal on a ballot paper when Parliament has made it abundantly clear they would block such a thing from happening.
It's too late for a pivot, unless we want to add another couple of years to the timetable.
So there's really only two options left, May's Deal or Remain. Frankly I think if there was no political fallout we wouldn't even be given the choice, Parliament would Revoke A50. The referendum will simply be to provide cover for Parliament doing what it has wanted to do all along, stop Brexit.
The only way we can leave the EU on any other terms than the WA is either a chaotic no-deal (which the electorate voted for) or the EU has to agree an extension of A50 to renegotiate (they won't).
Right. That article 50 extension comes only with EUref2, which is as toxic as No Deal. So all you need to do is retain sufficient faith in our politicians to not believe that they will sanction either of those horrors and voila the WA somehow goes through. This is the ledge on which I am standing as the waters rise. And I'm staying put for now. It is a very low bar, that parliament not do something stupid and borderline sadistic, and I think that after much huffing and puffing it can scrape over it.
I don't think you can say it is as toxic as no deal. EUref2 might be politically toxic to some (probably about 30% max), but it doesn't bring economic chaos, so not equivalent at all really.
On topic, a dogged refusal to change course can, thanks to a bias in the human mind, be seen as a praiseworthy characteristic in and of itself. In reality, a refusal to change tack when the winds of reality blow the ship of intent towards rocks or away from the channel, is often something that isn't totally a positive thing.
Of course, changing repeatedly and instantly to pressure is also a bad thing, but that error is more commonly noted and held against someone. The former error is usually not.
Unfortunately, reality often has the casting vote.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That is also my expectation. A50 will be revoked and the question of whether this will be temporary or permanent will be left open. But the reality is that it will be permanent.
Arguably (to say the least) Remain should not be on the ballot. The choices should be two leave options.
I suggested Norway vs No Deal the other day (with some tinkering around CU issues).
Doubt this will happen though.
I worry a great deal about the political turmoil that putting Remain on the ballot will cause.
I think your suggestion is spot on. It honours the referendum result, and allows everyone a voice. From the EU's point of view, they'd rather we were Norway, rather than out altogether, as we'd be handing over at least some money, and it makes us a rule taker. From our side it allows us to resolve what the future relationship looks like, and allows purists to argue for No Deal.
If parliament rejects May's deal by 420 - 220 (or thereabouts), why on earth should the very same deal then be put to a public referendum?
Likewise if Leave with No Deal is soundly rejected by parliament.
In electoral terms, it would be a case of "Reopen nominations", as none of the Brexit candidates so far presented are acceptable.
The only Brexit that has a chance of getting through parliament is a deal that Labour can sign on to. With most of Labour, half of the Tories and the DUP you have a parliamentary majority. That is the only way I can see a deal being agreed.
Slight problem is that Labour won't agree to anything while they think they have a chance of creating as much chaos as possible resulting in a GE that even Corbyn has a chance of winning. It is their only hope for electoral success. Both major parties are putting party before country
I think most voters accept May has got the only Deal available from the EU and Corbyn is exploiting the situation for political reasons rather than because he has any clear differences with May's Deal
May has taken what the EU gave her - nothing.
Rubbish. May has got an end to free movement and a temporary Customs Union against the norm, it is fanatics like you determined to send us over the cliff with No Deal
She hasn’t got an end to free movement because there is an important caveat on immigration to what she actually has agreed saying immigration is still up for negotiation in the trade negotiations.The temporary customs union is because she hasn’t got any clue how to satisfy the EU on the Irish border, and there are no signs it can be ever satisfied, leads to a permanent one if we go into the backstop and can’t get out.
I’d rather have a FTA myself with complete freedom to regulate our domestic economy as we see fit. That’s fairly standard amongst civilised nations that respect the rule of law. However if the choice is no deal or no Brexit, I would prefer the first to the second.
Well, @AmpfieldAndy I look forward to you explaining how to conclude a FTA whilst maintaining a complete freedom to regulate our domestic economy... hint: your explanation needs to account for the counter party to the FTA wishing to export to the U.K. market
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That is also my expectation. A50 will be revoked and the question of whether this will be temporary or permanent will be left open. But the reality is that it will be permanent.
Arguably (to say the least) Remain should not be on the ballot. The choices should be two leave options.
I suggested Norway vs No Deal the other day (with some tinkering around CU issues).
Doubt this will happen though.
I worry a great deal about the political turmoil that putting Remain on the ballot will cause.
I think your suggestion is spot on. It honours the referendum result, and allows everyone a voice. From the EU's point of view, they'd rather we were Norway, rather than out altogether, as we'd be handing over at least some money, and it makes us a rule taker. From our side it allows us to resolve what the future relationship looks like, and allows purists to argue for No Deal.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
What is wrong with a choice between Leave on the basis of the WA or Remain on current terms?
Meanwhile I see that it is all kicking off again in France and Belgium in relation to the Marrakech Declaration our own @Alanbrooke wrote about recently.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
Without the intention to serve article 50 again, you would be lighting a touchpaper.
Another vague but ominious threat of violence from you?
Tut tut.
A warning from history. You are creating a massively justified grievance that will damage our society and politics for years to come.
I hate to break it to you, but the grievance is already here. We're simply seeing the brutal political and economic consequences of pandering to those grievances.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
My guess is that it will be an A50 extension, followed by a referendum to choose between revoking A50 (remain) or May's Deal. I expect that by mid-summer next year it will be all over for Leave.
That is also my expectation. A50 will be revoked and the question of whether this will be temporary or permanent will be left open. But the reality is that it will be permanent.
Arguably (to say the least) Remain should not be on the ballot. The choices should be two leave options.
I suggested Norway vs No Deal the other day (with some tinkering around CU issues).
Doubt this will happen though.
I worry a great deal about the political turmoil that putting Remain on the ballot will cause.
I think your suggestion is spot on. It honours the referendum result, and allows everyone a voice. From the EU's point of view, they'd rather we were Norway, rather than out altogether, as we'd be handing over at least some money, and it makes us a rule taker. From our side it allows us to resolve what the future relationship looks like, and allows purists to argue for No Deal.
A Hobson's choice to blackmail Remainers into backing a Norway-style deal was always the plan of certain people, but putting it in a referendum shows absolute contempt.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
What is wrong with a choice between Leave on the basis of the WA or Remain on current terms?
Meanwhile I see that it is all kicking off again in France and Belgium in relation to the Marrakech Declaration our own @Alanbrooke wrote about recently.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
What is wrong with a choice between Leave on the basis of the WA or Remain on current terms?
Meanwhile I see that it is all kicking off again in France and Belgium in relation to the Marrakech Declaration our own @Alanbrooke wrote about recently.
On topic, a dogged refusal to change course can, thanks to a bias in the human mind, be seen as a praiseworthy characteristic in and of itself. In reality, a refusal to change tack when the winds of reality blow the ship of intent towards rocks or away from the channel, is often something that isn't totally a positive thing.
Of course, changing repeatedly and instantly to pressure is also a bad thing, but that error is more commonly noted and held against someone. The former error is usually not.
Unfortunately, reality often has the casting vote.
May's approach to Brexit has uncanny parallels with Margaret Thatcher's kamikaze act with the Poll Tax, she just put her head down, charged ahead, rejected all advice including from her own cabinet, and Boom, when reality hit both Thatcher and the tax imploded. May shows every sign of going the same way.
If parliament rejects May's deal by 420 - 220 (or thereabouts), why on earth should the very same deal then be put to a public referendum?
Likewise if Leave with No Deal is soundly rejected by parliament.
In electoral terms, it would be a case of "Reopen nominations", as none of the Brexit candidates so far presented are acceptable.
The only Brexit that has a chance of getting through parliament is a deal that Labour can sign on to. With most of Labour, half of the Tories and the DUP you have a parliamentary majority. That is the only way I can see a deal being agreed.
Slight problem is that Labour won't agree to anything while they think they have a chance of creating as much chaos as possible resulting in a GE that even Corbyn has a chance of winning. It is their only hope for electoral success. Both major parties are putting party before country
Which is why May needs to reach out and say she is looking for cross-party consensus. How could Starmer refuse an invitation to head over to Brussels to lead the negotiations?
A Hobson's choice to blackmail Remainers into backing a Norway-style deal was always the plan of certain people, but putting it in a referendum shows absolute contempt.
There's no need to throw insults around, but the problem is that putting a Norway-style option in a referendum is meaningless. This is because the EU's response would be 'Fine, ratify the existing Withdrawal Agreement - including crucially the backstop - and then over the next couple of years we can talk about whether the UK wishes to amend the political delaration'. So it gets us precisely nowhere.
If parliament rejects May's deal by 420 - 220 (or thereabouts), why on earth should the very same deal then be put to a public referendum?
Likewise if Leave with No Deal is soundly rejected by parliament.
In electoral terms, it would be a case of "Reopen nominations", as none of the Brexit candidates so far presented are acceptable.
The only Brexit that has a chance of getting through parliament is a deal that Labour can sign on to. With most of Labour, half of the Tories and the DUP you have a parliamentary majority. That is the only way I can see a deal being agreed.
Slight problem is that Labour won't agree to anything while they think they have a chance of creating as much chaos as possible resulting in a GE that even Corbyn has a chance of winning. It is their only hope for electoral success. Both major parties are putting party before country
Which is why May needs to reach out and say she is looking for cross-party consensus. How could Starmer refuse an invitation to head over to Brussels to lead the negotiations?
What negotiations? The deal is done. Surely everyone now realises that? There is no more negotiation to be had. THE DEAL IS DONE.
I think that they will cancel A50 using a cross party majority of MPs at the last minute.
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
What is wrong with a choice between Leave on the basis of the WA or Remain on current terms?
Meanwhile I see that it is all kicking off again in France and Belgium in relation to the Marrakech Declaration our own @Alanbrooke wrote about recently.
Comments
1) N Ireland.Without the Brexit madness there is no argument over hard borders etc. in N Ireland. If there does end up being a hard border this will very likely result in chaos for N Irish trade and possibly a breakdown in the Good Friday agreement and ultimately a more likely united Ireland. Some may argue this is no bad thing, but the instability and violence certainly would be. 2) Scotland. It does not take a genius to work out that Brexit makes Scots more likely to swing behind the Scottish Nationalists. Even the average Brexit enthusiast should be able to work that one out. Neither of these scenarios would be likely without Brexit, so hence why I say if UK of GB and N Ireland breaks up, then the thicky Brexiteers own it 100%. Some patriots eh? Fifth Columners/Putin useful idiots more like!
Our household savings rates are too low, which is to a large extent the result of the New Labour years, when subsidies on savings (PEPs, TESSAS to ISAs) were reduced.
In the long run, we need a (through the cycle) household savings rate of perhaps 10-12%. We're currently at less than half that level. If our savings rate were to go from 4% to 14%, that effectively means losing more than 10% of Final Consumption Expenditure, which would be a large drop in GDP (and would only be somewhat cushioned by a declining current account deficit).
This weekend, at first imperceptibly, and then at a torrent, the narrative coming from inside number 10 shifted.
Nobody is trying to sell May's deal any more. They've given up. The phony war is over, and everyone is now preparing for not *if*, but *when* the Meaningful Vote fails.
You have to bear May's comments in that light. She has finally accepted, as has cabinet, and the bunker, that her deal is dead. Everyone is positioning themselves for the coming constitutional crisis.
If Cabinet and Number 10 bounce the government into a second referendum, it will be a final personal and political humiliation for May. So what she's doing is her positioning herself so she has a path to a diginifed, honourable resignation.
If/when cabinet decides a 2nd ref is the best way forward, May has already laid the groundwork for bowing out gracefully.
The UK has had a collapse in investment. Not only will the recession be worse than our competitors, the recovery when it eventually comes will be very slow and shallow. The weakness of Sterling not withstanding, the long run business model of using "equity" from housing to buy other peoples products is finally running out of road. So prolonged house price weakness on top of everything else. You may have thought the past ten years were a bit tricky. Unless we get rid of the bullshit and focus on the reality of what is about to happen, the next ten years will definitively knock the UK economy out of the top ten global economies. JLR job losses presage a wholesale shift of manufacturing away from the non EU UK. Project Fear? Not scary enough.
It is you who are wilfully ignoring the evidence because it is inconvenient for your claims that this was all doomed from the start.
She's making a point of ensuring that when she resigns, it will be with dignity and a certain amount of grudging respect from her opponents; the absolute opposite way from the arrogant poshboy you-clean-up-my-mess-for-me-peasant flounce that Cameron executed.
One of the sophist's most powerful tools for befuddling the weak-minded.
*innocent face*
https://twitter.com/BrexitCentral/status/1074612747390910464
https://twitter.com/racefansdotnet/status/1074612019737911297
As metaphors go it's a bit on-the-nose.
Will it work? Perhaps not. Perhaps even probably not. Much depends on Labour. But I think there is a greater chance that it will than seems to be the consensus. Certainly I think that this widespread 'the deal is dead as a dodo' sentiment is premature. A lot of it, please note, is coming from the extreme leave and remain factions, both of whom desperately WANT the deal to be off the table so that their preferred No Deal or No Brexit can prevail.
Cannot wait.
Opposition to a second referendum can be seen as a psychological weapon she's wielding against the Brexiteers, with the message, "I'm not going to be the one to bail you out."
* Some people think it will be temporarily unpleasant, some that the unpleasantness wil llast for quite a while and some people think it will be totally disastrous. I've read nothing anywhere that suggests everything will be OK, although some suggest it will be a non-event like Y2k, although the possibility of disaster then was carefully planned for.
And I don't understand why anyone admires the pig-headed, obdurate and cruel Mrs May.
I wouldn't be surprised if hypothetical (And it is hypothetical due to the 12 month rule) non payroll confidence votes against/for May completely flip in the coming months.
However, as May is belatedly realising, that's just making the argument for remain stronger for a lot of people.
David Davis is a weapons-grade bellpiece and you should not listen to him.
Although I'm intrigued about which 'Bransley-based company' might have purchased it ...
They won't allow no deal and they won't have another referendum (what would the question even be?).
But Parliament has to choose.
It literally starts with "I". The conclusion is presumed in the very first letter.
The ballot paper just has YES and NO boxes, and you have to write your own question on it before you vote.
It's the only fair way.
But how the government enacts this without the Tories fracturing permanently eludes me.
60% of my area voted to leave. If you think that’s entirely old people you are making a mistake. How serious we will see.
Tut tut.
I'm also not ignoring evidence: unless you're confusing your opinions with 'evidence'. I may be putting different weight on 'evidence', but that's fair enough.
I am not claiming it was doomed from the start: just that it was nowhere near the slam-dunk many Brexiteers stupidly said it would be. I'm also rather dubious of any claim that there were not other pitfalls that May, or any notional negotiator, might have fallen into if other choices had been made.
This is especially true as you seem to think leavers could have done a better job. I find this an absolutely ludicrous assertion given their lack of skills and, in many cases, febrile hatred of the EU and lack of knowledge about it and our relationship shown by most Conservative leaver politicians.
Cancel then a confirmatory referendum seems a possible outcome. The markets before the deadline will be pretty ugly, so I'd have thought such a vote wouldn't be at all close.
https://youtu.be/7Mtet4-dJy8
I suggested Norway vs No Deal the other day (with some tinkering around CU issues).
Doubt this will happen though.
I worry a great deal about the political turmoil that putting Remain on the ballot will cause.
https://twitter.com/DMReporter/status/1074380994256478210
Likewise if Leave with No Deal is soundly rejected by parliament.
In electoral terms, it would be a case of "Reopen nominations", as none of the Brexit candidates so far presented are acceptable.
The only Brexit that has a chance of getting through parliament is a deal that Labour can sign on to. With most of Labour, half of the Tories and the DUP you have a parliamentary majority. That is the only way I can see a deal being agreed.
But I suspect once A50 is cancelled that will be the end of it.
Meanwhile I see that it is all kicking off again in France and Belgium in relation to the Marrakech Declaration our own @Alanbrooke wrote about recently.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/anti-refugee-violence-in-the-heart-of-brussels-vz9bgz6t5
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/president-macron-s-migrant-pledge-risks-splitting-his-party-j3kggm36w
La farce, c'est le mot juste du jour, and many jours to come.
And there were plenty of sensible posters on both sides of the debate who pointed out the same May mistakes I mentioned. You just want to paint all those people who disagree with you as holding views which are invalid.
There's no point putting No Deal on a ballot paper when Parliament has made it abundantly clear they would block such a thing from happening.
It's too late for a pivot, unless we want to add another couple of years to the timetable.
So there's really only two options left, May's Deal or Remain. Frankly I think if there was no political fallout we wouldn't even be given the choice, Parliament would Revoke A50. The referendum will simply be to provide cover for Parliament doing what it has wanted to do all along, stop Brexit.
In reality, a refusal to change tack when the winds of reality blow the ship of intent towards rocks or away from the channel, is often something that isn't totally a positive thing.
Of course, changing repeatedly and instantly to pressure is also a bad thing, but that error is more commonly noted and held against someone. The former error is usually not.
Unfortunately, reality often has the casting vote.
Labour 40%
Conservatives 37%
L dem 7%
UKIP 6%
Zoinks.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/17/ladbrokes-wooed-problem-gambler-then-paid-victims-1m?CMP=share_btn_tw