It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......
It won't be Hammond or Davis, too many enemies/critics in the party.
It'll be Sir Michael Fallon.
"Convicted drink driver Sir Michael Fallon" - please give him his full title
It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......
Think that is more in hope than expectation Tyson
The Tory Party may be many things, but it is very effective of despatching liabilities......
May's utterly bizarre press conference yesterday suggests that her use to the party may quickly come to an end after the GE.....
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
So did we make a one-off payment to 'buy' a share in the Community's assets when we joined, late to the party?
An interesting question. Which assets would those be in 1973, and were we not a net contributor from the start ?
Mr. Nabavi, I fear your argument is based on the supposition the EU is honest, fair, and logically consistent.
No, it's based on the point that if things break down and we have to say 'see you in court' they wouldn't have a leg to stand on, even assuming they could find a court to stand in (it's unclear which court might have jurisdiction).
So, if they want some dosh, they'll have to negotiate for it, and give us something commensurate in return, not simply demand it as though it were an obligation.
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
And any legal obligations we may have had disappear the moment we leave.
That's not "legally" true, though.
Is it not? I thought the only way there were enforceable was through the treaties. Given they would no longer apply to the UK, how would it be enforced?
You support their stance. You want us to suffer. You applaud their extortions. You urge them on as they seek to shaft us. Ugh. What a spectacle you are. Just a pound shop Quisling, really.
None of that is true.
You, however, are just trying to mentally insulate yourself from the consequences of your vote.
No, the consequences of your lardy-arsed laziness.
It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......
It won't be Hammond or Davis, too many enemies/critics in the party.
It'll be Sir Michael Fallon.
It will not be anybody
What? Ever?
Imagine being ruled by our Steel Haired She Trump until the sun reaches the end of its main sequence.
I think Le Pen will win Provence and she has a slim chance of winning regions she won in the first round in the North East too. Macron's debate winning margin was actually pretty close to his current poll rating once you exclude those who will abstain on Sunday
Is it not? I thought the only way there were enforceable was through the treaties. Given they would no longer apply to the UK, how would it be enforced?
We are obliged to honour our commitments as long as the treaties are in force
And if you are proposing that we wait until the treaties lapse as a means to avoid our commitments, what would that do to our standing at the WTO (or any other International body we want to be a part of) ?
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
So did we make a one-off payment to 'buy' a share in the Community's assets when we joined, late to the party?
An interesting question. Which assets would those be in 1973, and were we not a net contributor from the start ?
I think in one year we were a net recipient. 1975.
... “The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”" .. .
That's really excellent news. It demonstrates that they have conceded the crucial point that the European Union is a legal entity in its own right, with its own assets and liabilities, separate from member states.
It follows from that, as night follows day, the the UK as it leaves has absolutely no legal responsibility whatsoever for any liabilities, real or implied, which the EU has incurred or thinks it has incurred in relation to future spending plans. That of course includes pension libilities.
So that's the demand for €60bn, let alone €100bn, blown out of the water.
(This exact point was made, in more legalistic language, in the very good Lords report on the exit bill).
I don't pretend to understand the legal niceties here (not least the matter of who might have jurisdiction is sorting out any disputes), but if the EU really is the sole owner of the assets, why would that not also be true of future liabilities as you say ?
Is it not? I thought the only way there were enforceable was through the treaties. Given they would no longer apply to the UK, how would it be enforced?
We are obliged to honour our commitments as long as the treaties are in force
And if you are proposing that we wait until the treaties lapse as a means to avoid our commitments, what would that do to our standing at the WTO (or any other International body we want to be a part of) ?
So it is legally correct? Of course it would not look great, but my point was that there would be no legal obligation.
We leave at the end of two years, unless there is an agreement to extend the period.
You are despicable. Just revolting. There is nothing the EU would do to us which you wouldn't eagerly applaud and justify, they could demand weekly sexual access to every daughter in the land and you'd be saying hahahah Good for the EU, quite right too, I told you Brexit was crap.
You're a traitor. There it is. The conversation ends.
Calm down dear.
Then try and explain to your daughter why you gave away her future because you were taken in by Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage
It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......
It won't be Hammond or Davis, too many enemies/critics in the party.
It'll be Sir Michael Fallon.
"Convicted drink driver Sir Michael Fallon" - please give him his full title
I never knew that would that have any effect on a leadership bid ?
Republicanism baffles me. Can you honestly look at the choices confronting the Austrians and the Americans last year and the French this year and tell me an elected head of state would be an improvement?
I'm a strong believer in egalitarianism.
As a working class Pakistani heritage kid from the North, I was taught if I worked hard at school and in life, I could have every opportunity in life, which has turned out to be very true.
But sadly, you and I can't be the head of state, I find that wrong, would you support the principle of hereditary Prime Ministers?
As someone with Republican tendencies, I reckon the best thing that will happen for the cause, is when Charles is King.
Mr. Eagles, I'm surprised you want May to be head of state as well as head of government.
No, I believe we should have an elected head of state.
We have an elected head of state. Elected by God.
You're talking to an agnostic here, and only confirming my belief in the abolition of the monarchy.
Godspeed with your job relocation to the French Republic.
The real problem with hereditary royalty is the public obsession with the affairs, marriages, offspring, social events of all their relatives that have no consequence. Quite frankly its all very nauseating.
I'd be happy with a Pope kind of system for choosing a head of state.
I can see parts of North London loving the site of White smoke to signify a new leader!!
It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......
Zero chance of that, once May has her 100+ majority she will dominate the Tory Party in the way no Tory leader has since Thatcher at her height
You support their stance. You want us to suffer. You applaud their extortions. You urge them on as they seek to shaft us. Ugh. What a spectacle you are. Just a pound shop Quisling, really.
None of that is true.
You, however, are just trying to mentally insulate yourself from the consequences of your vote.
You are despicable. Just revolting. There is nothing the EU would do to us which you wouldn't eagerly applaud and justify, they could demand weekly sexual access to every daughter in the land and you'd be saying hahahah Good for the EU, quite right too, I told you Brexit was crap.
You're a traitor. There it is. The conversation ends.
Mr. Nabavi, I fear your argument is based on the supposition the EU is honest, fair, and logically consistent.
No, it's based on the point that if things break down and we have to say 'see you in court' they wouldn't have a leg to stand on, even assuming they could find a court to stand in (it's unclear which court might have jurisdiction).
So, if they want some dosh, they'll have to negotiate for it, and give us something commensurate in return, not simply demand it as though it were an obligation.
Correct on your second point. They are offering continuity of a relationship and the prospect of a new future relationship.
If we crash out, we will still need a relationship with other countries in Europe, which means going through the EU. They won't have forgotten about the money. At that point, someone will say, "just give it to them so we can get on with our lives". We save ourselves a lot of grief if we write it off as one of the many costs of Brexit, pay it and move onto discussions that we really want to have. It won't necessarily be €100 billion. There's a haggle to be had, but don't waste time or negotiating capital on it.
It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......
It won't be Hammond or Davis, too many enemies/critics in the party.
It'll be Sir Michael Fallon.
"Convicted drink driver Sir Michael Fallon" - please give him his full title
Not really an issue, happened over 30 years ago, and Cameron won a leadership contest whilst refusing to deny using Colombian marching powder.
I don't pretend to understand the legal niceties here (not least the matter of who might have jurisdiction is sorting out any disputes), but if the EU really is the sole owner of the assets, why would that not also be true of future liabilities as you say ?
The EU owns the assets, the EU has the liabilities. Nothing to do with us in either case. Their problem (and 'they' in this case is the European Union, not the individual countries which are members of it, although in practice it would be the EU27's problem.)
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.
You support their stance. You want us to suffer. You applaud their extortions. You urge them on as they seek to shaft us. Ugh. What a spectacle you are. Just a pound shop Quisling, really.
None of that is true.
You, however, are just trying to mentally insulate yourself from the consequences of your vote.
You are despicable. Just revolting. There is nothing the EU would do to us which you wouldn't eagerly applaud and justify, they could demand weekly sexual access to every daughter in the land and you'd be saying hahahah Good for the EU, quite right too, I told you Brexit was crap.
You're a traitor. There it is. The conversation ends.
There is a certain type of Remainer who would gladly cut off their own nose to spite their own face, if it also spites the faces of others they despise as well, because they feel no sense of obligation to respect a result they detest and believe was achieved in bad faith.
What they want is absolute penance from the Leavers, a grovelling apology and for the result to be overturned. At any price.
Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
Republicanism baffles me. Can you honestly look at the choices confronting the Austrians and the Americans last year and the French this year and tell me an elected head of state would be an improvement?
I'm a strong believer in egalitarianism.
As a working class Pakistani heritage kid from the North, I was taught if I worked hard at school and in life, I could have every opportunity in life, which has turned out to be very true.
But sadly, you and I can't be the head of state, I find that wrong, would you support the principle of hereditary Prime Ministers?
As someone with Republican tendencies, I reckon the best thing that will happen for the cause, is when Charles is King.
What I support is a head of state who is above party politics. Electing people to the position defeats that object.
I'm not an egalitarian. I accept that there are things I can't do. I can't give birth or run 100m in 9 seconds of be Chief Rabbi. The idea that anybody can do anything is a fantasy, and a dangerous one. It's enough that most people can do most things, with luck, brains and application. In some ways I think having a role that only one individual can fill is quite salutary.
Michael Higgins does a great job in Ireland and is widely admired.
The best arguments I see these days for keeping the Monarchy is that is better than having a politician as Head of State, and secondly the tourism it brings.
I suppose I should appreciate that our Royal family is primus inter pares of Royal families.
When the New York Times talks about 'The Royal Family' they aren't talking about the Dutch of Belgian one.
Actually I've always thought tourism was a lousy argument. How many tourists get to see The Queen?
Precisely my point as well - The fact France doesn't have a monarch makes no difference to my desire to visit Versailles -and because they do not have a monarch i will probably be able to get in.
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.
I genuinely don't understand those things for home use...What's wrong with something like a moka pot ?
Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
We voted to leave the club, but now they say we can't use the gym or the pool anymore.
WTF!
They keep telling us it's "not like leaving a golf club" (Juncker's exact words) "it's a divorce"
Except it IS like leaving a club when it suits them.
You support their stance. You want us to suffer. You applaud their extortions. You urge them on as they seek to shaft us. Ugh. What a spectacle you are. Just a pound shop Quisling, really.
For us it's a golf club, to them it's a divorce.
It's that difference (anchored in fundamental political and cultural differences in how we perceive the EU) that explains why we're leaving in the first place.
I do feel that having a hereditary position at the top of the UK social pyramid enshrines the whole upper class / middle class / working class thing which I am not convinced is good for the UK.
.... By the way, do you notice something about your use of the term "UK"? ....
I'll take that. It might also be opposed by the Northern Irish, who get forgotten all the time. ...
It is fascinating seeing your perspective through May tinted glasses.
First there is no conceivable way the UK will come out of this with a good deal. If it does, the other 27 members will pay close attention, and the EU will fall apart. Britain has to be punished for it's moment of populist folly otherwise the disease will spread and destroy the Union.
Second, the best person to get the deal must be someone who is capable of cultivating good relationships, socially adept, comfortable in their own shoes, jovial, humorous, diligent, hard working, reliable, intelligent, hard nosed, open minded, savvy, thick skinned, carries gravitas, able to compromise and empathise, pragmatic, charismatic.... Since we are leaving the EU the political affiliations of the person are much less important than their ability to strike a deal.
Since May carries few of the above, I would suggest it is in the UK's interests for her to remain as far away as possible.
David Davis is actually the best pic the Tories have as far as I can see. There could have been others, Osborne for instance, Mandelson another, Blair obviously, Cameron.....but May quite frankly needs to STFU because her interventions.... her control freakery, thin skin etc.... will be extremely damaging for the country.
Morning Tyson - If you think Theresa May will stand on the sidelines I think you will be dissappointed. However I hope a deal can be arrived at on citizens asap but unfortunately any idea they will stay under the ECJ for the rest of their lives is not going to happen.
As far as I am aware the conservative manifesto is going to include control of our borders, and the ending of the ECJ in our affairs. In those circumstances the ECJ will be replaced by our Supreme Court though a transistion period may be agreed
I fear you are right about May...that she is such an obsessional, control freak she will not be able to stop herself meddling....,.
that is precisely why I said yesterday the men in grey coats will be moving in approximately this time next year, and David Davis or Philip Hammond will be installed as the next PM......
Zero chance of that, once May has her 100+ majority she will dominate the Tory Party in the way no Tory leader has since Thatcher at her height
So it is legally correct? Of course it would not look great, but my point was that there would be no legal obligation.
We leave at the end of two years, unless there is an agreement to extend the period.
There is a legal obligation within those 2 years.
So you propose that our message to the World is we wish to avoid our legal obligations by waiting them out.
Awesome
Yeah, and no doubt we will meet them unless we leave earlier. I am talking about any additional money that the EU demands over and above our normal subs. I do not think there is any legal obligation for us to pay such demands, but I am happy to be proven wrong.
There is a certain type of Remainer who would gladly cut off their own nose to spite their own face, if it also spites the faces of others they despise as well, because they feel no sense of obligation to respect a result they detest and believe was achieved in bad faith.
What they want is absolute penance from the Leavers, a grovelling apology and for the result to be overturned. At any price.
They won't get it.
The Leavers already cut off our nose to spite our face.
What they want is absolute adulation from the Remainers, a grovelling thankyou and for the result to be deemed a success. At any price.
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.
There is a certain type of Remainer who would gladly cut off their own nose to spite their own face, if it also spites the faces of others they despise as well, because they feel no sense of obligation to respect a result they detest and believe was achieved in bad faith.
At this point I think it's more a case of pointing out to Leavers who are still in denial that cutting off our nose to spite our face is precisely what Brexit is.
Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
There's a dawn to lunchtime BBC special!
Some councils aren't expected to declare until 8PM on Friday. Utterly ridiculous!
Mr. Nabavi, I fear your argument is based on the supposition the EU is honest, fair, and logically consistent.
However, I do agree that the idea the EU thinks the liabilities exist for us but not assets is a totally bullshit stance practically designed to provoke ire and increase the chances of leaving without a deal.
Mr. Eagles, I went to Betfair Sportsbook to see the Con odds for Sedgefield, and they're only 4/6...
Tories odds-on in Sedgefield, what must Tony Blair be thinking now?
Yes, with every new day another pile of bullshit comes from the EU and Theresa's Tories gain a few more seats.
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.
Funny you should say that ..... I and Her Indoors called in at at our local Currys last Christmas with a view to purchasing said Nespresso until we were persuaded out of doing so by one of their own staff, who described it as one of the greatest dust gatherers ever devised by man!
May's utterly bizarre press conference yesterday suggests that her use to the party may quickly come to an end after the GE.....
It was impressively mental even by the standards of these febrile times.
Her to-camera piece about Prince P (at the start of bbcdp, doubtless to be repeated) was a bit weird as well. She seemed unduly hyper and her facial expressions seemed to be operating independently from what she was saying.
It is just as impossible to join the elite as it always was. You can get some money, get patronised by them, go to some of their parties, you might even be able to marry them, but you can't join them.
There are more class divisions than just the "elite", but I agree with your overall point about joining the "elite". Personally I do not give a monkeys what the "elite" do, they are irrelevant to my life and I would not want to live their lives
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
I fancy that many businesses and individuals (on both sides of this change) will have made up their minds one way or the other long before March 2019.
They will decide what is in their personal or business interests, where their bread is most generously buttered and locate accordingly. They will also stock up in advance of any uncertainty.
That's the beauty of Article 50. It removes the cliff edge. Everyone knows a couple of years in advance and can plan accordingly.
It is just as impossible to join the elite as it always was. You can get some money, get patronised by them, go to some of their parties, you might even be able to marry them, but you can't join them.
There are more class divisions than just the "elite", but I agree with your overall point about joining the "elite". Personally I do not give a monkeys what the "elite" do, they are irrelevant to my life and I would not want to live their lives
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.
Funny you should say that ..... I and Her Indoors called in at at our local Currys last Christmas with a view to purchasing said Nespresso until we were persuaded out of doing so by one of their own staff, who described it as one of the greatest dust gatherers ever devised by man!
Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
There's a dawn to lunchtime BBC special!
Some councils aren't expected to declare until 8PM on Friday. Utterly ridiculous!
Counting STV is fascinating but not particularly fast.
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.
Are you mad? My Nespresso Pixie wrote THE ICE TWINS. I was fuelled on fifty-eight shots of caffeine a day. Like Balzac.
Fair enough. When I was writing novels all I had was a Krupps bean to cup job.
Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
There's a dawn to lunchtime BBC special!
Some councils aren't expected to declare until 8PM on Friday. Utterly ridiculous!
Counting STV is fascinating but not particularly fast.
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
No deal means they get no divorce money, no ongoing net contributions, reduced crime and military/ security cooperation, and Ireland is screwed economically.
They might also end up with a competitor on its doorstep that undercuts it (we know the EU is worried about this because they put dumping clauses in the negotiating guidelines) that looks sympathetically on other states that might seek to leave in future, like Denmark, EIRE and Sweden, rather than acting as a bulwark. And it's global reputation may also be damaged.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but the EU will have significant troubles of its own if it fails to agree.
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.
I think you are grossly underestimating just how bad that is in terms of the competitiveness of exports, the price of imports, and the ability of the UK to attract inward investment.
I also think it would be bad for the EU, and I do expect a deal. But I wouldn't be blasé about WTO terms. May says "better no deal than a bad deal", but this ignores the fact that no deal is a pretty dire deal.
We're paying our dues for the 2 years. There's no problem at all.
That not what the Brexiteers have been demanding here all week.
Pay Nothing! Just walk away!
Some. And mostly is response to the idea it's pay nothing and walk away, or pay 100 billion which includes preposterous future commitments we are highly unlikely to be legally liable for.
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
So did we make a one-off payment to 'buy' a share in the Community's assets when we joined, late to the party?
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.
Funny you should say that ..... I and Her Indoors called in at at our local Currys last Christmas with a view to purchasing said Nespresso until we were persuaded out of doing so by one of their own staff, who described it as one of the greatest dust gatherers ever devised by man!
Per drink they are also pretty damn expensive.
I have some friends who have them. The machines tend to get used when they have visitors.
For myself, i use a cafetiere which gives me a lot of randomness in my coffee. Most cups are good but occasionally you get one that is spectacular and a lovely surprise
I have some friends who have them. The machines tend to get used when they have visitors.
For myself, i use a cafetiere which gives me a lot of randomness in my coffee. Most cups are good but occasionally you get one that is spectacular and a lovely surprise
There is a certain type of Remainer who would gladly cut off their own nose to spite their own face, if it also spites the faces of others they despise as well, because they feel no sense of obligation to respect a result they detest and believe was achieved in bad faith.
At this point I think it's more a case of pointing out to Leavers who are still in denial that cutting off our nose to spite our face is precisely what Brexit is.
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
No deal means they get no divorce money, no ongoing net contributions, reduced crime and military/ security cooperation, and Ireland is screwed economically.
They might also end up with a competitor on its doorstep that undercuts it (we know the EU is worried about this because they put dumping clauses in the negotiating guidelines) that looks sympathetically on other states that might seek to leave in future, like Denmark, EIRE and Sweden, rather than acting as a bulwark. And it's global reputation may also be damaged.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but the EU will have significant troubles of its own if it fails to agree.
That's absolutely right. Getting no money and no deal is at least as bad for the EU as it is for us.
Incidentally, the question of which Court might have jurisdiction over any dispute over liabilities is rather delicious. Once we've left, we're no longer subject to the European Court of Justice because the EU treaties would no longer apply to us. Normally, disputes over treaties are referred to the International Court of Justice at the Hague. Unfortunately (or fortunately) the European Union is not a member of the United Nations so it has no standing at the International Court of Justice. No problem, you might think; the 27 EU countries could bring the case against us.
Except that: the Lisbon Treaty states that any legal action by member states regarding the EU treaties can only be brought in the ECJ.
Just going through the YouGov figures from yesterday and was struck by this discrepancy:
Thinking about the General Election expected on 8th June, will you definitely vote for the party you mentioned earlier, or might you change your mind?
Definitely vote: Con 71 Lab 59 LD 38 Probably vote, v unlikely to change: Con 21 Lab 29 LD 35 Possibly vote, chance of change: Con 7 Lab 15 LD 20 Probably change: Con 0 Lab 0 LD 2 (rest are DKs)
What's relevant here is that the uncertainty in voting intention doesn't cross over much into an uncertainty to vote (indeed, LD voters are more certain to vote than Lab ones, despite being much less sure about who they'll vote *for*).
This might be a classic example of a poll being a snapshot rather than a prediction. Were it a prediction, you'd want to redistribute a sizable chunk of the Lib Dem vote and a smaller amount of the Lab one.
On the other hand, once again, the Lib Dems were oversampled. rcs1000 pointed out pre-2015 how the undersampling of the LDs then was a good pointer to false recall and an exaggeration of their vote share. The reverse is probably happening now. (As a rule, all parties are overrepresented as against non-voters, probably because voters tend to be more likely to engage; the issue here is that the Lib Dems are routinely *disproportionately* overrepresented).
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Yes, this is starting to turn into the nightmare scenario many of us dreaded - the EU acting like petulant b*stards while we're totally exposed and helpless. Perhaps the slow realization of this explains Theresa's erratic performance yesterday. Fear does that.
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
We voted to leave the club, but now they say we can't use the gym or the pool anymore.
WTF!
They keep telling us it's "not like leaving a golf club" (Juncker's exact words) "it's a divorce"
Except it IS like leaving a club when it suits them.
You support their stance. You want us to suffer. You applaud their extortions. You urge them on as they seek to shaft us. Ugh. What a spectacle you are. Just a pound shop Quisling, really.
For us it's a golf club, to them it's a divorce.
It's that difference (anchored in fundamental political and cultural differences in how we perceive the EU) that explains why we're leaving in the first place.
If it is going to be a messy divorce then then there is no need to have a "decent break between partners"
Fox needs to get a move on and start finding some fit nubile partners on International Match.com
Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
There's a dawn to lunchtime BBC special!
Some councils aren't expected to declare until 8PM on Friday. Utterly ridiculous!
Counting STV is fascinating but not particularly fast.
An English council....
Then you are right, that is ridiculous. Are they giving their staff a lie in because of late working on polling day?
I have a feeling turnout in this election will be appalling.
Just called my mother to remind her to vote - she didn't even know there was an election...
Are you referring to the locals today, to the GE or to both. If turnout at the GE is lower than usual, which of the two main parties would benefit?
Labour - as a result of the two parties only getting out their core vote and also from fewer ex-kippers turning out to vote [mainly] Tory ?
Tories - as a result of the main body on non-voters being on the Labour side, deciding they were unable to vote for Corbyn.
Net beneficiary? Not sure ,,,,, tricky to call.
Largely the locals - but my canvassing last night found far more apathy than normal for the general, too... I think the general will overshadow the locals, too.
Unusually quiet at my polling station this morning. No tellers for anyone which is a bit unusual. It is a slightly weird STV system up here. I voted 1, 2, 3 for the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour. The 2 SNP candidates I didn't bother differentiating between. Doubt it will make any difference as we already have an SNP and Tory Councillor from the ward so I don't see any of the other Unionist parties getting a look in.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
There's a dawn to lunchtime BBC special!
Some councils aren't expected to declare until 8PM on Friday. Utterly ridiculous!
Counting STV is fascinating but not particularly fast.
An English council....
Then you are right, that is ridiculous. Are they giving their staff a lie in because of late working on polling day?
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.
If we move to WTO terms, can tariffs be applied to all goods and what is the rate?
At this point I think it's more a case of pointing out to Leavers who are still in denial that cutting off our nose to spite our face is precisely what Brexit is.
It's interesting, although entirely predictable, that Brexiteers, who were told before the vote that Brexit would be difficult and painful, are now cheering on the most difficult, most painful versions of Brexit they can conjure
As if they are trying to reassure themselves they did the right thing
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
The EU is slow-starving the Greeks to death.
In a Remainer's mind I guess that's ' making it easier' than fast-starving them to death.
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
No deal means they get no divorce money, no ongoing net contributions, reduced crime and military/ security cooperation, and Ireland is screwed economically.
They might also end up with a competitor on its doorstep that undercuts it (we know the EU is worried about this because they put dumping clauses in the negotiating guidelines) that looks sympathetically on other states that might seek to leave in future, like Denmark, EIRE and Sweden, rather than acting as a bulwark. And it's global reputation may also be damaged.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but the EU will have significant troubles of its own if it fails to agree.
That's absolutely right. Getting no money and no deal is at least as bad for the EU as it is for us.
And yet we are supposed to believe they don't care about a deal and therefore it's impossible for them to make a misstep with their demands, to read some opinions. Unrealistic expectations can go both ways.
@Morris_Dancer: I fear your argument is based on the supposition the EU is honest, fair, and logically consistent.
Classically informed by Thucydides in the Melian dialogues, where Athens justifies its imminent crushing of Melos if it doesn't submit:
Athenians : Then we on our side will use no fine phrases saying, for example, that we have a right to our empire because we defeated the Persians, or that we have come against you now because of the injuries you have done us — a great mass of words that nobody would believe. And we ask you on your side not to imagine that you will influence us by saying that you, though a colony of Sparta, have not joined Sparta in the war, or that you have never done us any harm. Instead we recommend that you should try to get what it is possible for you to get, taking into consideration what we both really do think; since you know as well as we do that, when these matters are discussed by practical people, the standard of justice depends on the equality of power to compel and that in fact the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.
Melians : Then in our view (since you force us to leave justice out of account and to confine ourselves to self-interest) — in our view it is at any rate useful that you should not destroy a principle that is to the general good of all men — namely, that in the case of all who fall into danger there should be such a thing as fair play and just dealing, and that such people should be allowed to use and to profit by arguments that fail short of a mathematical accuracy. And this is a principle which affects you as much as anybody, since your own fall would be visited by the most terrible vengeance and would be an example to the world.
Athenians : As for us, even assuming that our empire does come to an end, we are not despondent about what would happen next. One is not so much frightened of being conquered by a power which rules over others, as Sparta does (not that we are concerned with Sparta now), as of what would happen if a ruling power is attacked and defeated by its own subjects. So far as this point is concerned, you can leave it to us to face the risks involved. What we shall do now is to show you that it is for the good of our own empire that we are here and that it is for the preservation of your city that we shall say what we are going to say. We do not want any trouble in bringing you into our empire, and we want you to be spared for the good both of yourselves and of ourselves.
Melians : And how could it be just as good for us to be the slaves as for you to be the masters?
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
Yes, and they have every reason to play out their strong hand fully.
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
And yet they can be as brutal as they like but the worst that can happen is that we fall to trading with the EU solely on WTO terms.
I think you are grossly underestimating just how bad that is in terms of the competitiveness of exports, the price of imports, and the ability of the UK to attract inward investment.
I also think it would be bad for the EU, and I do expect a deal. But I wouldn't be blasé about WTO terms. May says "better no deal than a bad deal", but this ignores the fact that no deal is a pretty dire deal.
I am not blasé about it. It would cause disruption to the management of pan-European energy, transport and telecommunication networks, it would add a customs burden to transcontinental trade, and it might affect our attractiveness for inward investment as a market gateway to Europe on services. Businesses would have 6 months-2 years of shock therapy in adjusting, and that could cause a mild recession as they relocated/restructured.
However, for all that, trade between the UK and EU would not stop, the attractiveness of the common law system, language and UK services expertise (globally) would be retained, both PwC and Open Europe assessed our economy continuing to grow under a WTO "crash" scenario to 2030, estimated at c.29% v. 37%, and various mitigation measures with corporation tax/regulation could be taken to mitigate any effect. Some of which Hammond has outlined.
So, very disruptive, a real shock, but very, very far from fatal.
This is really quite unbelievable stuff from the EU. No way will TMay be able to sell this.
It was presumed EU assets would be divided between Britain and the rEU, for the jolly good reason that we have paid billions towards many of them, and if we are expected to cough up for spending commitments, we jolly well get our share of these assets we bought.
But no.
"It had been hoped by some in the UK that Britain could offset its liabilities by reference to its share of EU buildings, investments and even its generous wine cellar, but it is understood that it was the EU member states who decided to stand firm on the issue.
“The EU assets belong to the union and the EU member states do not have any rights to those assets,” an EU official said. “There is no shareholding in the European Union. All of the union’s assets belong to the union and that includes buildings, other assets tangible and intangible, financial, drinkable and non-drinkable.”"
The EU constantly tells us that Brexit is a divorce, so it will be messy and painful. There is no other way. Fair enough. But in what kind of divorce do the house, the car, the air miles and the Nespresso machine all belong to "the wedding", and therefore they are, funnily enough, all kept by one party to the divorce, and the other party must fuck off with nothing.
Fuck the EU.
They can keep the Nespresso machine. Useless bloody things.
Funny you should say that ..... I and Her Indoors called in at at our local Currys last Christmas with a view to purchasing said Nespresso until we were persuaded out of doing so by one of their own staff, who described it as one of the greatest dust gatherers ever devised by man!
Per drink they are also pretty damn expensive.
I have some friends who have them. The machines tend to get used when they have visitors.
For myself, i use a cafetiere which gives me a lot of randomness in my coffee. Most cups are good but occasionally you get one that is spectacular and a lovely surprise
When Mrs Sandpit and I got married a couple of years back, we pooled all the monetary gifts we received and treated ourselves to a proper coffee machine - Beans go in the top, coffee comes out of the bottom. A fantastic thing it is too, especially given that we both work from home a lot. Personal Starbucks! https://espresso.com/products/delonghi-primadonna-s-de-luxe-ecam-26-455-m
So it is legally correct? Of course it would not look great, but my point was that there would be no legal obligation.
We leave at the end of two years, unless there is an agreement to extend the period.
There is a legal obligation within those 2 years.
So you propose that our message to the World is we wish to avoid our legal obligations by waiting them out.
Awesome
We're paying our dues for the 2 years. There's no problem at all.
Of course. We all agree that we cough up something, to cover the 2 years. Maybe some more for goodwill.
But it is clear the EU has gone a bit crazy, presumably overwhelmed with demands from each of the 27 states, and decided to ask us to hand over our pension, and go live in a nunnery, and also give sexual relief to Michel Barnier, every Tuesday afternoon til 2029.
They're overplaying it hideously (probably more by accident than design, though it will suit some in the Commission) and it will lead to Crash Brexit.
The sorts of Brits the EU talks to are people like ScottP and Alastair Meeks, who will be egging them on to be as harsh as possible, and providing them with all the validation they need that they are pursuing the right strategy.
This is worse than a divorce, in a divorce there is a judge to decide some semblance of fairness (Supposedly). I think the EU realises the strength of it's hand if it keeps a united front and is acting accordingly, I don't think the final settlement will be remotely "fair".
No deal means they get no divorce money, no ongoing net contributions, reduced crime and military/ security cooperation, and Ireland is screwed economically.
They might also end up with a competitor on its doorstep that undercuts it (we know the EU is worried about this because they put dumping clauses in the negotiating guidelines) that looks sympathetically on other states that might seek to leave in future, like Denmark, EIRE and Sweden, rather than acting as a bulwark. And it's global reputation may also be damaged.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but the EU will have significant troubles of its own if it fails to agree.
That's absolutely right. Getting no money and no deal is at least as bad for the EU as it is for us.
It is likely to exacerbate internal friction as well.
They will start to blame each other for the loss of money and the loss of trade.
Comments
May's utterly bizarre press conference yesterday suggests that her use to the party may quickly come to an end after the GE.....
Which assets would those be in 1973, and were we not a net contributor from the start ?
So, if they want some dosh, they'll have to negotiate for it, and give us something commensurate in return, not simply demand it as though it were an obligation.
If we were a small country like Greece or Slovakia, they might want to make things easier for us so we wouldn't slip into Russia's sphere of influence, but the UK has nowhere else to go geopolitically, and is too big to treat as just a minor event. Their interests dictate that they need to be absolutely brutal.
https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/859924707604353024
Imagine being ruled by our Steel Haired She Trump until the sun reaches the end of its main sequence.
And if you are proposing that we wait until the treaties lapse as a means to avoid our commitments, what would that do to our standing at the WTO (or any other International body we want to be a part of) ?
We leave at the end of two years, unless there is an agreement to extend the period.
Then try and explain to your daughter why you gave away her future because you were taken in by Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage
Labour - as a result of the two parties only getting out their core vote and also from fewer ex-kippers turning out to vote [mainly] Tory ?
Tories - as a result of the main body on non-voters being on the Labour side, deciding they were unable to vote for Corbyn.
Net beneficiary? Not sure ,,,,, tricky to call.
And yes I do shop there...
If we crash out, we will still need a relationship with other countries in Europe, which means going through the EU. They won't have forgotten about the money. At that point, someone will say, "just give it to them so we can get on with our lives". We save ourselves a lot of grief if we write it off as one of the many costs of Brexit, pay it and move onto discussions that we really want to have. It won't necessarily be €100 billion. There's a haggle to be had, but don't waste time or negotiating capital on it.
What they want is absolute penance from the Leavers, a grovelling apology and for the result to be overturned. At any price.
They won't get it.
Really frustrating that these results are going to dribble out tomorrow with minimal coverage. They look like they could be genuinely interesting, especially in Scotland and Wales.
So you propose that our message to the World is we wish to avoid our legal obligations by waiting them out.
Awesome
It's that difference (anchored in fundamental political and cultural differences in how we perceive the EU) that explains why we're leaving in the first place.
Of course, a sensible, negotiated agreement would be best. The EU claiming we have liabilities but no assets is not necessarily conducive to concord.
What they want is absolute adulation from the Remainers, a grovelling thankyou and for the result to be deemed a success. At any price.
They won't get it.
Yes, with every new day another pile of bullshit comes from the EU and Theresa's Tories gain a few more seats.
Pay Nothing! Just walk away!
Been working your morley magic in Manchester Mr Herdson
They will decide what is in their personal or business interests, where their bread is most generously buttered and locate accordingly. They will also stock up in advance of any uncertainty.
That's the beauty of Article 50. It removes the cliff edge. Everyone knows a couple of years in advance and can plan accordingly.
Now I know where it all went wrong!
They might also end up with a competitor on its doorstep that undercuts it (we know the EU is worried about this because they put dumping clauses in the negotiating guidelines) that looks sympathetically on other states that might seek to leave in future, like Denmark, EIRE and Sweden, rather than acting as a bulwark. And it's global reputation may also be damaged.
That doesn't mean it won't happen, but the EU will have significant troubles of its own if it fails to agree.
I also think it would be bad for the EU, and I do expect a deal. But I wouldn't be blasé about WTO terms. May says "better no deal than a bad deal", but this ignores the fact that no deal is a pretty dire deal.
For myself, i use a cafetiere which gives me a lot of randomness in my coffee. Most cups are good but occasionally you get one that is spectacular and a lovely surprise
@andywightman: #votedgreen https://twitter.com/andywightman/status/860098298719457280/photo/1
@Maomentum_: DO NOT USE THE DOG PROVIDED AT THE POLLING STATION, PLEASE PLEASE USE YOUR OWN DOG.
#DogsAtPollingStations
Except that: the Lisbon Treaty states that any legal action by member states regarding the EU treaties can only be brought in the ECJ.
Good, isn't it?
Luxury.
We 'ad to make do with second hand tea bags, if we were lucky!
Thinking about the General Election expected on 8th June, will you definitely vote for the party you mentioned earlier, or might you change your mind?
Definitely vote: Con 71 Lab 59 LD 38
Probably vote, v unlikely to change: Con 21 Lab 29 LD 35
Possibly vote, chance of change: Con 7 Lab 15 LD 20
Probably change: Con 0 Lab 0 LD 2
(rest are DKs)
What's relevant here is that the uncertainty in voting intention doesn't cross over much into an uncertainty to vote (indeed, LD voters are more certain to vote than Lab ones, despite being much less sure about who they'll vote *for*).
This might be a classic example of a poll being a snapshot rather than a prediction. Were it a prediction, you'd want to redistribute a sizable chunk of the Lib Dem vote and a smaller amount of the Lab one.
On the other hand, once again, the Lib Dems were oversampled. rcs1000 pointed out pre-2015 how the undersampling of the LDs then was a good pointer to false recall and an exaggeration of their vote share. The reverse is probably happening now. (As a rule, all parties are overrepresented as against non-voters, probably because voters tend to be more likely to engage; the issue here is that the Lib Dems are routinely *disproportionately* overrepresented).
Fox needs to get a move on and start finding some fit nubile partners on International Match.com
http://election.pressassociation.com/Declaration_times/all_2017_by_time.php
As if they are trying to reassure themselves they did the right thing
In a Remainer's mind I guess that's ' making it easier' than fast-starving them to death.
But it's still shit if you're Greek.
Classically informed by Thucydides in the Melian dialogues, where Athens justifies its imminent crushing of Melos if it doesn't submit:
Athenians : Then we on our side will use no fine phrases saying, for example, that we have a right to our empire because we defeated the Persians, or that we have come against you now because of the injuries you have done us — a great mass of words that nobody would believe. And we ask you on your side not to imagine that you will influence us by saying that you, though a colony of Sparta, have not joined Sparta in the war, or that you have never done us any harm. Instead we recommend that you should try to get what it is possible for you to get, taking into consideration what we both really do think; since you know as well as we do that, when these matters are discussed by practical people, the standard of justice depends on the equality of power to compel and that in fact the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.
Melians : Then in our view (since you force us to leave justice out of account and to confine ourselves to self-interest) — in our view it is at any rate useful that you should not destroy a principle that is to the general good of all men — namely, that in the case of all who fall into danger there should be such a thing as fair play and just dealing, and that such people should be allowed to use and to profit by arguments that fail short of a mathematical accuracy. And this is a principle which affects you as much as anybody, since your own fall would be visited by the most terrible vengeance and would be an example to the world.
Athenians : As for us, even assuming that our empire does come to an end, we are not despondent about what would happen next. One is not so much frightened of being conquered by a power which rules over others, as Sparta does (not that we are concerned with Sparta now), as of what would happen if a ruling power is attacked and defeated by its own subjects. So far as this point is concerned, you can leave it to us to face the risks involved. What we shall do now is to show you that it is for the good of our own empire that we are here and that it is for the preservation of your city that we shall say what we are going to say. We do not want any trouble in bringing you into our empire, and we want you to be spared for the good both of yourselves and of ourselves.
Melians : And how could it be just as good for us to be the slaves as for you to be the masters?
However, for all that, trade between the UK and EU would not stop, the attractiveness of the common law system, language and UK services expertise (globally) would be retained, both PwC and Open Europe assessed our economy continuing to grow under a WTO "crash" scenario to 2030, estimated at c.29% v. 37%, and various mitigation measures with corporation tax/regulation could be taken to mitigate any effect. Some of which Hammond has outlined.
So, very disruptive, a real shock, but very, very far from fatal.
Anyway, time for me to be off.
https://espresso.com/products/delonghi-primadonna-s-de-luxe-ecam-26-455-m
They will start to blame each other for the loss of money and the loss of trade.