Just looking up countries that left free trade arrangements, which doesn't seem to happen very often. Ended up running back into countries that previously left the EU.
For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.
For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
Hague and Howard, the 2001 general election loser or the 2005 general election loser, no thanks we may as well keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in the electoral cycle; and he was far too young and inexperienced. Like many people he has matured with age, has aquired experience and honed his political skills. He is far better than Theresa May,
JRM is like Boris, but with less piffle. He is a posho, but like Boris is comfortable in his skin in a way that Dave Cameron occasionally got wrong. He is intelligent articulate and charming.
His politics are a century out of date, and it is that that would lose dozens of seats. Still better than May, though.
I would not even consider voting Tory if JRM was the leader. I want to go forwards to the future, not backwards to the past.
Why should we care what you think?
You haven't said anything vaguely Conservative or centre-right for years, and your posts are mostly full of childish smiley faces and thumbs-up.
The behaviour of the Conservatives over the last few years have pushed me leftwards and convinced me that the current centre right are a bunch of self-obsessed, delusional, vain, glory-seeking incompetent halfwits.
The next few years is looking like something I can take a stab at now, underpinned by the twin metastabilities of Tory grip on power and Corbyn grip on his own position.
May's survival is dependent on Brexit progressing, and if she looks like a barrier to the negotiation she is gone. Unfortunately, she is a plodder, decent when A50 needed to be prepared or extraditing a hate preacher, but not nimble enough to work against the clock on a GE campaign or with Brexit. She will be gone this year, perhaps a month or two later than the ideal timetable, and Davis will succeed her. The Tories will remain metastable.
Brexit will be some degree of bad to terrible or could collapse entirely, depending primarily on how ordered it is. There will be large scale public unrest. Davis will be gone by 2020 - if Brexit was merely bad, Boris has a chance, if terrible a Cameroon, perhaps Ruth, will be favoured. The grip on power will remain metastable.
The Tories will cling on until 2022 no matter what, with the DUP sticking around, sometimes used, sometimes distanced. If we assume by elections and losses in line within the ageing of the very comfortably off, they will just about get through, their metastability battered but unbowed by Brexit, economy, leadership changes, poisonous blamestorming and terrible morale. Fundamentally, the Conservatives end up with little more than a confidence and supply arrangement with themselves.
Labour's troubles will not go away, but their disunity will be minor news. The battles over process remains and the McDonnell amendment, for instance, will get gummed up. There is a very good chance Corbyn will fight GE22, but if events do go to prevent this, a soft left move is likely, with Lewis or Thornberry both possible.
I think the polls will show Labour somewhat ahead going into GE22 with the shine quickly off the third Tory leader of the term, but with Corbyn PM as the theme, it will not be a foregone conclusion.
Interesting predictions Mystic Rata.
Personally I don't know what's going to happen next week nevermind in 2022...
I've felt like that and tried to sort it with a "what do we know" train of thought. And we know that the establishment is still sat at the dice table, stripped to its underwear, possibly beyond. Does it (1) roll the dice one more time, (2) make a run for the door, (3) sit making small talk in the corner, re-adjusting regularly to preserve its modesty, hoping no-one will notice it is sitting out the ongoing game. Answer (3) and much of the above becomes fairly high probability.
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
Hague and Howard, the 2001 general election loser or the 2005 general election loser, no thanks we may as well keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in the electoral cycle; and he was far too young and inexperienced. Like many people he has matured with age, has aquired experience and honed his political skills. He is far better than Theresa May,
I campaigned for Hague when we were trounced, I campaigned for May when we comfortably won most seats. Sorry, been there, done that, if there is to be a new leader it has to be Boris (but only after Brexit)
Have to say - Osborne as editor does seem to be a great appointment for political obsessives... Some fascinating inside info he can turn into stories...
Is this the start of the new Liberal Party of Great Britain?
Well the LDs are also part of the group, if there was to be a UK En Marche this looks like who would comprise it
I suspect En Marche will crash and burn. Macron has been most unimpressive so far, as President.
If he liberalises the French Labour market, he will likely go down as a success. If he fails to take on vested interests, then the French economy will stagnate, and he will rightly be regarded as a failure.
Have to say - Osborne as editor does seem to be a great appointment for political obsessives... Some fascinating inside info he can turn into stories...
Or some spectacular score settling and grudge bearing depending on your point of view....
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
Hague and Howard, the 2001 general election loser or the 2005 general election loser, no thanks we may as well keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in the electoral cycle; and he was far too young and inexperienced. Like many people he has matured with age, has aquired experience and honed his political skills. He is far better than Theresa May,
I campaigned for Hague when we were trounced, I campaigned for May when we comfortably won most seats. Sorry, been there, done that, if there is to be a new leader it has to be Boris (but only after Brexit)
There is simply no comparison between the circumstances of the 2001 GE and that of 2017.
On Boris, he ticks the charisma box, but that is just about all. He, along with May and Gove, are responsible for repelling professional, middle class and business voters with the kind of outcome we saw in Kensington, to name but one example.
Have to say - Osborne as editor does seem to be a great appointment for political obsessives... Some fascinating inside info he can turn into stories...
Or some spectacular score settling and grudge bearing depending on your point of view....
Yes but surely you have to admit it's really interesting!
Is this the start of the new Liberal Party of Great Britain?
Well the LDs are also part of the group, if there was to be a UK En Marche this looks like who would comprise it
I suspect En Marche will crash and burn. Macron has been most unimpressive so far, as President.
He has impressed me mostly. He is a French patriot who understands the real world. But he has yet to confront his biggest challenge. If he delivers the reforms that French voters gave him a mandate for he will be putting his country on a very progressive, promising path. I can see why the right and the left dislike him so much.
Rightsizing the armed forces to a level commensurate with defending the UK would be the single best and easiest policy any political party could come up with.
From yesterday's discussion on university funding, a strong reason not to trash the sector is that it's a very big positive contributor to our balance of payments: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40447950
There are good reasons for funding reform, but whatever we do should be carefully considered, rather than brought in by May in a desperate attempt to salvage her popularity... or Corbyn in a ferment of social justice enthusiasm.
They promised to abolish fees for new students - they are still sticking to that line I believe.
What they are now watering down is the promise to write-off the loanbook for previous students, in particular the £9000 per year generation. I think that policy was one of Corbyn's that he made up mid-interview.
The crucial questions are these.
To abolish fees, the State has to pay the fees. Is Labour going to pay 9,250 k per student? Is Labour going to pay for the 1.8 million students we have ?
If so, the cost is not what Labour say it is.
Labour can make the policy affordable by (i) reducing the number of students and (ii) refusing to pay 9k but say 6k.
In fact, they will have to do one or the other if they think (like Angela Rayner) it will cost 9 billion.
The demonising of Universities by Adonis suggests to me that Labour will go for (ii).
Under the current loans system many of the loans will not be paid off. Who pays then? In that case how can you quote the £9250 figure which is clearly not going to be paid back?
The liability is transferred to future taxpayers. ( I am not saying I agree with it, just stating what happens),
At the moment, the Universities receive 9250 per student regardless.
They will be concerned if the plan is to make free tuition affordable for the State by paying less than 9250 per student.
In fact, some of the universities will go bankrupt.
It is an outrage that socalled degree courses from some mickey mouse institutions running courses in Sports Studies, Media Studies, Photography ,Film Studies etc should be costed at £9250 per annum . Only Oxbridge and Russell Group Universities should be permitted to charge such fees - whether paid by students or the State. If some of the new Universities offering pretty garbage courses disappear or are forced to slim down , who is going to miss them?
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
I don't underestimate it, it's a disaster. However, a change of leader would still leave the government looking weak, incompetent and divided. Some of that is because of the PM's personal position, but much of it is the inevitable result of being a minority government at a time which was always going to be difficult.
It would be different if there were an alternative, charismatic and unifying figure who had successfully grabbed the initiative and pulled things together by sheer force of character. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
Hague and Howard, the 2001 general election loser or the 2005 general election loser, no thanks we may as well keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in the electoral cycle; and he was far too young and inexperienced. Like many people he has matured with age, has aquired experience and honed his political skills. He is far better than Theresa May,
I campaigned for Hague when we were trounced, I campaigned for May when we comfortably won most seats. Sorry, been there, done that, if there is to be a new leader it has to be Boris (but only after Brexit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE and that of 2017.
On Boris, he ticks the charisma box, but that is just about all. He, along with May and Gove, are responsible for repelling professional, middle class and business voters with the kind of outcome we saw in Kensington, to name but one example.
Hague has the worst general election record of any Tory leader for a 100 years, he was fine as a Cabinet Minister but I would not put him anywhere near the Tory leadership again.
As for Boris he twice won Labour London and the EU referendum and as far as general election 2017 the Tories still won 318 seats and while they lost Kensington they won Middlesbourough South and Cleveland for example, it was not all 1 way traffic
Have to say - Osborne as editor does seem to be a great appointment for political obsessives... Some fascinating inside info he can turn into stories...
Or some spectacular score settling and grudge bearing depending on your point of view....
Yes but surely you have to admit it's really interesting!
For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.
What does New Zealand have?
Lots of agricultural commodities.
And Norway has fish and oil? Iceland has fish? Switzerland has cuckoo clocks? As far as I can tell it's just a lot of excuses as to why other countries don't have to surrender lots of political sovereignty to trade, whilst the UK does.
And Norway has fish and oil? Iceland has fish? Switzerland has cuckoo clocks? As far as I can tell it's just a lot of excuses as to why other countries don't have to surrender lots of political sovereignty to trade, whilst the UK does.
Colour me unconvinced.
And all of those countries have massive, International, integrated, Just in Time manufacturing supply chains supporting their key industries, just like we do.
From yesterday's discussion on university funding, a strong reason not to trash the sector is that it's a very big positive contributor to our balance of payments: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40447950
There are good reasons for funding reform, but whatever we do should be carefully considered, rather than brought in by May in a desperate attempt to salvage her popularity... or Corbyn in a ferment of social justice enthusiasm.
I was just wondering why someone like Gina Millar doesn't sue the Labour Party for false representation. They pledged to abolish tuition fees which undoubtedly caused many youngsters to vote for them. Now that pledge is an aim, or ambition.
So their lying very probably cost the Cons their OM and that surely is actionable.
(IANAL, obvs)
Writing off existing student debt is an ambition. Abolishing fees is a policy.
100 billion rising to 200 billion to wipe of student debt is beyond credible. The abolishion of student fees is coming under considerable examination not least by the Guardian and is another unaffordable promise. The GE and TM avoided any real examination of labour's policies or the IFS widescale condemnation of them.
One thing is certain at the next GE labour will come under much more scrutiny on their mickey mouse promises
We have not so far heard from the Universities themselves.
I would imagine that they are getting increasingly concerned.
If the policy is to pay less than 9250 per student, then this will lead to redundancies in the Universities.
University staff vote overwhelmingly Labour.
If all this results in some Universities going private how will that help education for the disadvantaged
It depends at what level Labour set the fees. But, if they set the fees at the level so that the policy costs 9 billion (Rayner's figure), then that is a rough halving of the fees.
My guess is then all the Russell group will go private.
If Labour trim it to 8k, then maybe the Universities will just grumble (and there will be substantial redundancies).
But to what extent has the growth in student numbers brought about an increase in academic and administrative staff at the universities? Much of the effect is to be seen in much bigger seminar/tutorial groups and fewer hours of direct teaching or student contact with tutors. I suspect that the quality of many courses is now much lower compared with the 1970s & 1980s.
And Norway has fish and oil? Iceland has fish? Switzerland has cuckoo clocks? As far as I can tell it's just a lot of excuses as to why other countries don't have to surrender lots of political sovereignty to trade, whilst the UK does.
Colour me unconvinced.
And all of those countries have massive, International, integrated, Just in Time manufacturing supply chains supporting their key industries, just like we do.
Transferring fees from loans to the State paying from general taxation will mean less money for universities. No doubt about it. HE will be competing with NHS, schools etc etc for the limited public pot and there will be cuts every time there is a downturn.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
r. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
Hague and Howard, the 2001 general election loser or the 2005 general election loser, no thanks we may as well keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in the electoral cycle; and he was far too young and inexperienced. Like many people he has matured with age, has aquired experience and honed his political skills. He is far better than Theresa May,
I campaigned for Hague when we were trounced, I campaigned for May when we comfortably won most seats. Sorry, been there, done that, if there is to be a new leader it has to be Boris (but only after Brexit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE and that of 2017.
On Boris, he ticks the charisma box, but that is just about all. He, along with May and Gove, are responsible for repelling professional, middle class and business voters with the kind of outcome we saw in Kensington, to name but one example.
Hague has the worst general election record of any Tory leader for a 100 years, he was fine as a Cabinet Minister but I would not put him anywhere near the Tory leadership again.
As for Boris he twice won Labour London and the EU referendum and as far as general election 2017 the Tories still won 318 seats and while they lost Kensington they won Middlesbourough South and Cleveland for example, it was not all 1 way traffic
You could have said something similar about Attlee in 1935 and Churchill in 1945. It means nothing because the circumstances were not right. But for Attlee 1945 was a triumph and Churchill returned as PM in 1951.
The modest gains in the north are satisfying but the loss of Kensington is emblematic of a far more serious fracture in the Tory coalition. May's performance was far worse than it looks because only Scotland saved the party (and the country) from total disaster.
Transferring fees from loans to the State paying from general taxation will mean less money for universities. No doubt about it. HE will be competing with NHS, schools etc etc for the limited public pot and there will be cuts every time there is a downturn.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
Well, tbf, elections and political parties are all about giving things to people in one way or another.
Thing is, Jezza is operating in violation of Economics Rule #1: resources are scarce.
Transferring fees from loans to the State paying from general taxation will mean less money for universities. No doubt about it. HE will be competing with NHS, schools etc etc for the limited public pot and there will be cuts every time there is a downturn.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
you should watch the student on Daily Politics today
"Corbyn is right, because the country has too much debt"
But to what extent has the growth in student numbers brought about an increase in academic and administrative staff at the universities? Much of the effect is to be seen in much bigger seminar/tutorial groups and fewer hours of direct teaching or student contact with tutors. I suspect that the quality of many courses is now much lower compared with the 1970s & 1980s.
Cummings led the Leave campaign promising reduced immigration and £350 million a week for the NHS while May was a Remainer, there are many things that could be said about him, most unprintable
Transferring fees from loans to the State paying from general taxation will mean less money for universities. No doubt about it. HE will be competing with NHS, schools etc etc for the limited public pot and there will be cuts every time there is a downturn.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
Well, tbf, elections and political parties are all about giving things to people in one way or another.
Thing is, Jezza is operating in violation of Economics Rule #1: resources are scarce.
He only operates according to 'rules' laid out in the communist manifesto.
This is not a good look. Although Cummings is the High Priest of Leave surely he appreciates that Theresa is now Queen of Brexit. Cummings' outburst creates the impression that the British euro-sceptic movement is riven with animosity, division and strife. Moreover it calls into question the level of Theresa's competence. A little loyalty would suit him more.
If the University product doesn't do much for job prospects, and cannot be afforded by the student or the tax payer - perhaps the best thing to is to change the product to something that is useful and can be afforded.
"Buckingham is ranked 1st in the UK in the Complete University Guide for student satisfaction, and joint 2nd for staff-to-student ratios. A 2-year degree structure is based on 4 terms a year rather than 3, with 13 weeks of vacation rather than 22 weeks. This means less debt, more focus."
And Norway has fish and oil? Iceland has fish? Switzerland has cuckoo clocks? As far as I can tell it's just a lot of excuses as to why other countries don't have to surrender lots of political sovereignty to trade, whilst the UK does.
Colour me unconvinced.
And all of those countries have massive, International, integrated, Just in Time manufacturing supply chains supporting their key industries, just like we do.
Oh, wait...
Pathetic, like all your other posts.
Prat.
I run a medical technology company that is part of the global supply chain and trades heavily with Switzerland. Can this country go it alone? Yes of course. Is it a good idea? Almost certainly not and especially not if done rapidly.
The transition will overall provide losers but within that there will be some big losers and some winners. My company is probably a winner. We already see international competition losing interest in the UK market allowing us to quote pretty much what we want.
To offset that we have more costs and mostly they come from the Government's desperate search for money. Not only are business property taxes in the UK a joke but we also get hit with most of the costs of stupid ideas such as Hinckley. I just signed a £650 PO to get the UK Government to review a submission to allow me to continue testing water. This is for a half day audit by a demotivated public servant. The UK uses regulations as a way to tax business. Leaving the EC will lead to more regulations not fewer.
Come on, chaps, let's not be horrid to one another.
Too late for that. PB is just like the rest of the United Kingdom Asunder. The breach has been rent open by the lunacy of Brexit and cannot be healed. It's Fuckers vs Wankers to the death now. It'll probably end up like Yugoslavia
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
r. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
Hague and Howard, the 2001 general election loser or the 2005 general election loser, no thanks we may as well keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in the electoral cycle; and he was far too young and inexperienced. Like many people he has matured with age, has aquired experience and honed his political skills. He is far better than Theresa May,
I campaigned for Hague when we were trounced, I campaigned for May when we comfortably won most seats. Sorry, been there, done that, if there is to be a new leader it has to be Boris (but only after Brexit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE ane example.
Hague has the worst general election record of any Tory leader for a 100 years, he was fine as a Cabinet Minister but I would not put him anywhere near the Tory leadership again.
As for Boris he twice won Labour London and the EU referendum and as far as general election 2017 the Tories still won 318 seats and while they lost Kensington they won Middlesbourough South and Cleveland for example, it was not all 1 way traffic
You could have said something similar about Attlee in 1935 and Churchill in 1945. It means nothing because the circumstances were not right. But for Attlee 1945 was a triumph and Churchill returned as PM in 1951.
The modest gains in the north are satisfying but the loss of Kensington is emblematic of a far more serious fracture in the Tory coalition. May's performance was far worse than it looks because only Scotland saved the party (and the country) from total disaster.
May had a better rating than Cameron in Scotland so that helped there. However how on earth is the man who led the 'save the pound' campaign going to win over Europhiles and having backed Remain how is he going to win over Leavers? At least Boris has the Leave vote
This is not a good look. Although Cummings is the High Priest of Leave surely he appreciates that Theresa is now Queen of Brexit. Cummings' outburst creates the impression that the British euro-sceptic movement is riven with animosity, division and strife. Moreover it calls into question the level of Theresa's competence. A little loyalty would suit him more.
If you want to know Cummings' record on loyalty ask IDS and Cameron!
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
r. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
ell keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in the electoral cycle; and he was far too young and inexperienced. Like many people he has matured with age, has aquired experience and honed his political skills. He is far better than Theresa May,
Ixit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE ane example.
Haguy leader for a 100 years, he was fine as a Cabinet Minister but I would not put him anywhere near the Tory leadership again.
As for Boris he twice won Labour London and the EU referendum and as far as general election 2017 the Tories still won 318 seats and while they lost Kensington they won Middlesbourough South and Cleveland for example, it was not all 1 way traffic
You could have said something similar about Attlee in 1935 and Churchill in 1945. It means nothing because the circumstances were not right. But for Attlee 1945 was a triumph and Churchill returned as PM in 1951.
The modest gains in the north are satisfying but the loss of Kensington is emblematic of a far more serious fracture in the Tory coalition. May's performance was far worse than it looks because only Scotland saved the party (and the country) from total disaster.
May had a better rating than Cameron in Scotland so that helped there. However how on earth is the man who led the 'save the pound' campaign going to win over Europhiles and having backed Remain how is he going to win over Leavers? At least Boris has the Leave vote
Save the pound is ancient history - practically no one wants to join the Euro. In fact that campaign is already long won, and Hague deserves some credit for it, even though he lost in 2001. The poor election results this year were partly a consequence of a REMAIN backlash. There is no one less equipped than Boris to counter that.
Transferring fees from loans to the State paying from general taxation will mean less money for universities. No doubt about it. HE will be competing with NHS, schools etc etc for the limited public pot and there will be cuts every time there is a downturn.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
It's a great policy that means the poorest will pay more tax AND be less likely to have the chance of going to university, all in order so the middle class young (who are the luckiest people yet born) get a "free" education and keep more of their future income. Up the workers!
If the University product doesn't do much for job prospects, and cannot be afforded by the student or the tax payer - perhaps the best thing to is to change the product to something that is useful and can be afforded.
"Buckingham is ranked 1st in the UK in the Complete University Guide for student satisfaction, and joint 2nd for staff-to-student ratios. A 2-year degree structure is based on 4 terms a year rather than 3, with 13 weeks of vacation rather than 22 weeks. This means less debt, more focus."
You are making the classic mistake of actually thinking about a problem — the costs and benefits of education — you aren't meant to do that, you are meant to follow dogma and bleat about fairness.
If the University product doesn't do much for job prospects, and cannot be afforded by the student or the tax payer - perhaps the best thing to is to change the product to something that is useful and can be afforded.
"Buckingham is ranked 1st in the UK in the Complete University Guide for student satisfaction, and joint 2nd for staff-to-student ratios. A 2-year degree structure is based on 4 terms a year rather than 3, with 13 weeks of vacation rather than 22 weeks. This means less debt, more focus."
You are making the classic mistake of actually thinking about a problem — the costs and benefits of education — you aren't meant to do that, you are meant to follow dogma and bleat about fairness.
The government should make it illegal for employers to consider degree qualifications and university unless there is a clear vocational need (eg medicine or teaching).
But that won't happen as it would disadvantage all the posh kids reading Geography at Oxford before joining the BBC or a bank.
If the University product doesn't do much for job prospects, and cannot be afforded by the student or the tax payer - perhaps the best thing to is to change the product to something that is useful and can be afforded.
"Buckingham is ranked 1st in the UK in the Complete University Guide for student satisfaction, and joint 2nd for staff-to-student ratios. A 2-year degree structure is based on 4 terms a year rather than 3, with 13 weeks of vacation rather than 22 weeks. This means less debt, more focus."
You are making the classic mistake of actually thinking about a problem — the costs and benefits of education — you aren't meant to do that, you are meant to follow dogma and bleat about fairness.
Michael Gove might say education is valuable in itself and not just as a trade qualification, but he is a baby-eating Tory.
Transferring fees from loans to the State paying from general taxation will mean less money for universities. No doubt about it. HE will be competing with NHS, schools etc etc for the limited public pot and there will be cuts every time there is a downturn.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
It's a great policy that means the poorest will pay more tax AND be less likely to have the chance of going to university, all in order so the middle class young (who are the luckiest people yet born) get a "free" education and keep more of their future income. Up the workers!
A powerful argument for progressive taxation. Up the workers.
The Euratom Treaty was extensively amended by the Treaty of Lisbon, though it continues to have a separate existence from the EU Treaties. Most significantly, Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty, as amended, now provides that “Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (the Article that sets out the procedure for EU withdrawal) … shall apply to this Treaty.”
.....Withdrawal from Euratom was therefore not a question of stubborn absolutism on the part of the Prime Minister over submission to the jurisdiction of the CJEU. It was, rather, an inevitable legal consequence of the decision of the British people to withdraw from the EU. The only legal means of effecting withdrawal is by serving an Article 50 notice, which, as illustrated above, also has the automatic effect of withdrawing from Euratom.
Presumably we'll have associate membership of Euratom like Switzerland and there won't be a problem?
Looks like another entirely made-up scare (this time trying to worry people with Cancer) from Continuity Remain...
I don't really get the fuss. Presumably we will find some fudge solution to this one too.
Nobody voted to leave the EU because they didn't like Euratom, so I'd have thought some kind of arrangement can easily be sorted - provided of course TM doesn't go full headbanger on this ECJ thing.
Didn't the government do a similar climb down on European patents and the ECJ? I think Southam Observer wrote an article on it...
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
r. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
ell keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in May,
Ixit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE ane example.
Haguy leader for a 100 years, he was fine as a Cabinet Minister but I traffic
You could have said something similar about Attlee in 1935 and Churchill in total disaster.
May had a better rating than Cameron in Scotland so that helped there. However Leave vote
Save the pound is ancient history - practically no one wants to join the Euro. In fact that campaign is already long won, and Hague deserves some credit for it, even though he lost in 2001. The poor election results this year were partly a consequence of a REMAIN backlash. There is no one less equipped than Boris to counter that.
The poor results were due to the Dementia Tax, ending the triple lock and austerity not a 'Remain backlash' and Boris will largely reverse much of that anyway. Having had a door slammed in my face in 2001 when asked how a voter was voting and being told 'not for that twat' I fail to see how 16 years later he is suddenly a great vote winner for the party. It was Boris who twice won in Labour London and Boris who largely won the referendum for Leave, in a contest between Boris and Hague to be leader there is no contest. Hague can play a role in the negotiations but as a Tory member I would not consider him as a future leader and I doubt he would want it either
The government should make it illegal for employers to consider degree qualifications and university unless there is a clear vocational need (eg medicine or teaching).
But that won't happen as it would disadvantage all the posh kids reading Geography at Oxford before joining the BBC or a bank.
I agree with both your points, education is valuable in itself, and employers do too often treat a degree as a box tick ("educated, probably not a total waster").
That said, there is no doubt that most people attend university with an eye to a future career, and if people feel the debt incurred is not worth it then we really ought to be asking what would be worth it beyond a snap "free" education answer. More vocational qualifications, more apprenticeships, degrees taken alongside employment, there must be all sorts of ways of making higher education both more affordable and more valuable to the person studying.
A powerful argument for progressive taxation. Up the workers.
How does Labour plan on doing that when they have already ruled out income tax rises for almost everyone, no changes to VAT or NI, and are committing to vastly increased spending? I think rottenborough has it right, higher education might be "free" under Labour but the money available would decline and that would inevitable hit the poorest hardest.
If the University product doesn't do much for job prospects, and cannot be afforded by the student or the tax payer - perhaps the best thing to is to change the product to something that is useful and can be afforded.
"Buckingham is ranked 1st in the UK in the Complete University Guide for student satisfaction, and joint 2nd for staff-to-student ratios. A 2-year degree structure is based on 4 terms a year rather than 3, with 13 weeks of vacation rather than 22 weeks. This means less debt, more focus."
You are making the classic mistake of actually thinking about a problem — the costs and benefits of education — you aren't meant to do that, you are meant to follow dogma and bleat about fairness.
The government should make it illegal for employers to consider degree qualifications and university unless there is a clear vocational need (eg medicine or teaching).
But that won't happen as it would disadvantage all the posh kids reading Geography at Oxford before joining the BBC or a bank.
There are plenty of avenues where you don't need a degree e.g. accountancy but you still need further qualifications, some very posh people never went to university e.g. Prince Harry, Winston Churchill, Lord Thurso etc and some working class people did e.g. David Davis, David Blunkett etc
Anecdote alert: at a big wedding over the weekend, then a trade fair and dinner with the in-laws.
To a man and woman anyone who I talked politics with (40-50 in total) was infuriated with Remainers talking of trying to subvert the result. Similarly, all that went further suggested that we obviously can't be part in part out. These were largely AB1s, a handful of C1/2s too.Quite surprising given how many Remainers (and leavers to, tbh) here increasingly suggest there is no appetite for actual Brexit.
To the contrary, I'd suggest that apart from among fervent politicos, there is no appetite for anything but Brexit. The government line is correct. Nerves need to be held.
Yet to meet anyone who's anecdote didn't simply confirm their view of the world.
It think you underestimate the cost of weak/broken leadership. If you could find someone like Howard who could offer managerial competence and the ability to hold cabinet discipline you would find your position improves.
Right now you look incompetent and divided. That will kill you.
r. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
ell keep May for now
Ixit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE ane example.
May had a better rating than Cameron in Scotland so that helped there. However how on earth is the man who led the 'save the pound' campaign going to win over Europhiles and having backed Remain how is he going to win over Leavers? At least Boris has the Leave vote
Save the pound is ancient history - practically no one wants to join the Euro. In fact that campaign is already long won, and Hague deserves credit for it even though he lost in 2001. The poor election results this year were partly a consequence of a REMAIN backlash. There is no one less equipped than Boris to counter that.
Agreed. If the Tories have sense it is time for a clean brush, a Mercer / Tugendhat / Stewart type. Anyone but Jesse Norman.
Isn't the big picture on Brexit that there is no majority for any particular outcome either in parliament or in the country (with the POSSIBLE exception if you believe certain polls of a national majority for remain now.)
How is that having won the referendum by capturing a national mood, the winning side have made no progress in convincing those who didn't vote for it that it won't be a disaster? You can see it in the comments here and elsewhere - surely the biggest mistake of May has been charging on with 'citizens of nowhere' when she needed to unite the country not just double down the division? For me she got her just desserts in the general election as a result. To those who've always been in favour of Brexit and still holding the line - how will you take the country with you? Feels that the referendum mandate is paper thin now and this is the thinking needed to keep the country together.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
ell keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in May,
Ixit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE ane example.
Haguy leader for a 100 years, he was fine as a Cabinet Minister but I traffic
You could have said something similar about Attlee in 1935 and Churchill in total disaster.
May had a better rating than Cameron in Scotland so that helped there. However Leave vote
Save the pound is ancient history - practically no one wants to join the Euro. In fact that campaign is already long won, and Hague deserves some credit for it, even though he lost in 2001. The poor election results this year were partly a consequence of a REMAIN backlash. There is no one less equipped than Boris to counter that.
The poor results were due to the Dementia Tax, ending the triple lock and austerity not a 'Remain backlash' and Boris will largely reverse much of that anyway. Having had a door slammed in my face in 2001 when asked how a voter was voting and being told 'not for that twat' I fail to see how 16 years later he is suddenly a great vote winner for the party. It was Boris who twice won in Labour London and Boris who largely won the referendum for Leave, in a contest between Boris and Hague to be leader there is no contest. Hague can play a role in the negotiations but as a Tory member I would not consider him as a future leader and I doubt he would want it either
Hague as leader would almost be as bad as Jacob Rees Mogg.
It's Hammond for me. I think Boris has been found out.
Come on, chaps, let's not be horrid to one another.
Too late for that. PB is just like the rest of the United Kingdom Asunder. The breach has been rent open by the lunacy of Brexit and cannot be healed. It's Fuckers vs Wankers to the death now. It'll probably end up like Yugoslavia
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I am sitting here watching my country hurtle down the road to oblivion and you are chiding me because I do not believe in "My country - right or wrong"? I am supposed to have a stiff upper lip and put on my diamonds and best gown and discuss the weather with tuxedo clad gents whilst the ship sinks under us all?
Come on, chaps, let's not be horrid to one another.
Too late for that. PB is just like the rest of the United Kingdom Asunder. The breach has been rent open by the lunacy of Brexit and cannot be healed. It's Fuckers vs Wankers to the death now. It'll probably end up like Yugoslavia
Which? PB or the UK?
PB. Plenty of people argue over Brexit but few see it as the life and death issue that so many posters here do.
This is not a good look. Although Cummings is the High Priest of Leave surely he appreciates that Theresa is now Queen of Brexit. Cummings' outburst creates the impression that the British euro-sceptic movement is riven with animosity, division and strife. Moreover it calls into question the level of Theresa's competence. A little loyalty would suit him more.
Like all political sects, euroscepticism always was riven with animosity, division and strife. Even during the Referendum there were two leave campaigns because they couldn't agree with each other.
Still can't fathom why the Tories are going for this drawn out, painful leadership contest.
Well, we're supposed to be asking you now..
What do you suggest?
New leader, snap election asap. Do or die.
Hanging on never works. You may fear Corbyn, but you will only gain a few months at the cost of your party by dragging this out.
Ok. We'd be roasted though.
As things stand, you're going to get roasted.
Pick the right leader (senior, safe, but charismatic - Hague), find some popular policies (cut tax, cut tuition fees, NHS funding), get the barnacles off the boat (hard/ideological brexit) and run the right campaign (its all about the economy, stupid!) you might do well.
Better than this slow death.
Interesting. Thanks.
Tory govt's go off the rails when they ditch pragmatic management of the economy in favour of ideology.
Hard Brexit is a textbook example of that.
That might be one of the few advantages of it. It could put both main parties off ideology for a generation or two.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
For their own sake, if not the country's sake, the Conservatives need a leader who can tell the party we are as a matter of necessity going for Single Market with freedom of movement, ECJ and customs union. There are only two viable options for the UK and if you don't like the Single Market, the other one is full membership of the EU, which you and the country as a whole rejected.
Otherwise the nightmare for the party and the country will go on and on and on. It doesn't matter what you thought you voted for. There will be no comprehensive trade agreement with the EU in the near future. They have no interest in replicating a system they already have just because the UK, a country that they owe no favours to, demands it. There will be no system of trade deals with other countries to make up. The Single Market is the only possible way of putting the EU thing to bed. We go from being half in the EU to being half out, declare the job done. And move on.
One wonders how countries like Canada, Japan and Australia manage given the only viable options for national survival are the EU and the EU in all but name.
It's not impossible but Japan has a long-term-meh economy, and that's despite a substantially bigger domestic population than the UK.
Canada and Australia have huge land masses with lots of natural resources, which makes for quite a different kind of economy.
What does New Zealand have?
Lots of agricultural commodities.
And Norway has fish and oil? Iceland has fish? Switzerland has cuckoo clocks? As far as I can tell it's just a lot of excuses as to why other countries don't have to surrender lots of political sovereignty to trade, whilst the UK does.
Colour me unconvinced.
The flaw in your thinking is not seeing that Norway and Switzerland already have less sovereignty over trade than we do.
Prison policy is either (a) privatise or (b) build superprisons miles from anywhere and stuff them to the gills. Neither seems to have worked. It is a shame the government won the case to stop prisoners voting.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I am sitting here watching my country hurtle down the road to oblivion and you are chiding me because I do not believe in "My country - right or wrong"? I am supposed to have a stiff upper lip and put on my diamonds and best gown and discuss the weather with tuxedo clad gents whilst the ship sinks under us all?
Get over yourself. The 19th Century is long gone.
Brexit is about the future, not the past.
If you weren't such a hyperbolic dimwit, you'd recognise that.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I am sitting here watching my country hurtle down the road to oblivion and you are chiding me because I do not believe in "My country - right or wrong"? I am supposed to have a stiff upper lip and put on my diamonds and best gown and discuss the weather with tuxedo clad gents whilst the ship sinks under us all?
Get over yourself. The 19th Century is long gone.
Brexit is about the future, not the past.
If you weren't such a hyperbolic dimwit, you'd recognise that.
Public service announcement: It is a pleasant summer's day and this is just an internet forum.
Feels that we could all do with turning the temperature down a notch - I found the site much more readable over the GE, even though I didn't post much I still lurk a lot.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
Transferring fees from loans to the State paying from general taxation will mean less money for universities. No doubt about it. HE will be competing with NHS, schools etc etc for the limited public pot and there will be cuts every time there is a downturn.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
It's a great policy that means the poorest will pay more tax AND be less likely to have the chance of going to university, all in order so the middle class young (who are the luckiest people yet born) get a "free" education and keep more of their future income. Up the workers!
A powerful argument for progressive taxation. Up the workers.
Yes, you could do that. The trouble is that the more you do it the more it crowds out private choice within the economy.
There's only so much money it makes sense to spend on health, education, social care and childcare. Because, whilst important, there is more to a good quality of life than just those things, and at the very least many ways of them being delivered.
The trouble with "all tax is good" is that you eventually get to a point where compulsorily confiscating the revenues of the economy, and then deciding how to spend them centrally, entrenches existing practice and leads to a lack of innovation, and dynamism stagnation and malaise within the producers, and dependency amongst the consumers.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I am sitting here watching my country hurtle down the road to oblivion and you are chiding me because I do not believe in "My country - right or wrong"? I am supposed to have a stiff upper lip and put on my diamonds and best gown and discuss the weather with tuxedo clad gents whilst the ship sinks under us all?
Get over yourself. The 19th Century is long gone.
Brexit is about the future, not the past.
If you weren't such a hyperbolic dimwit, you'd recognise that.
Deluded thinking. The future is about greater and closer international co-operation, and Brexit is Britain (England) trying to stop the world and get off.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
Prison policy is either (a) privatise or (b) build superprisons miles from anywhere and stuff them to the gills. Neither seems to have worked. It is a shame the government won the case to stop prisoners voting.
Your last sentence is a total non-sequiter.
However, I agree prison reform is an urgent issue. And I'm depressed the Government hasn't done more in this area.
I suspect the real issue is that it's not a politically resonant area in which to spend limited public funds.
Can you imagine having to work as one of those poor prison officers?
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
I wasn't talking to you.
Mind your own business.
When on an open forum, it is not a private conversation.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
DecrepitJohnL - for most people it is just a colossal waste of time.
A few years ago the most popular A level for girls was psychology (not sure of its ranking now).
Well an A level in psychology leads to a degree in psychology...
"While those with an undergraduate degree in psychology do not have all of the job options available as those with a master's or doctorate in psychology, there are many entry-level jobs for college graduates with a bachelor's degree. These career options might initially appear to have little to do with the field of psychology."
then better get a master's degree...
"However, students are often unaware of exactly what they can do with their master's degrees post-graduation. Some students might opt to pursue their master's as a step toward a doctorate."
already £80,000 in debt, a PhD would bring that to £140,000. Perhaps have to say enough, just another year of teacher training then - a more reasonable total of £100,000 and only 7 years of study - and back to the beginning.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I am sitting here watching my country hurtle down the road to oblivion and you are chiding me because I do not believe in "My country - right or wrong"? I am supposed to have a stiff upper lip and put on my diamonds and best gown and discuss the weather with tuxedo clad gents whilst the ship sinks under us all?
Get over yourself. The 19th Century is long gone.
Brexit is about the future, not the past.
If you weren't such a hyperbolic dimwit, you'd recognise that.
Deluded thinking. The future is about greater and closer international co-operation, and Brexit is Britain (England) trying to stop the world and get off.
Bollocks.
If you listened to Gove, Hannan, Carswell, or Cummings, you'd know that Brexit is about more globalisation, not less, and sees the EU as the past, not the future.
So many knobs on here totally obsessed with their own parodies of Brexit and their own stupid characterisations of it.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I am sitting here watching my country hurtle down the road to oblivion and you are chiding me because I do not believe in "My country - right or wrong"? I am supposed to have a stiff upper lip and put on my diamonds and best gown and discuss the weather with tuxedo clad gents whilst the ship sinks under us all?
Get over yourself. The 19th Century is long gone.
Brexit is about the future, not the past.
If you weren't such a hyperbolic dimwit, you'd recognise that.
Deluded thinking. The future is about greater and closer international co-operation, and Brexit is Britain (England) trying to stop the world and get off.
The future is about not being ruled by an unelected, undemocratic federalist superstate.
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
Politically, that is not the case. If the economic aspect had been available without the politics, I would've happily voted for that. But the EU demands ever more power and is constantly shifting it from nation-states to the centre. Failed referendum results are either ignored or re-run until acceptance is given to EU centralisation. Brown reneged upon a manifesto commitment to a referendum on Lisbon, and now the EU Army, derided as a myth by federalists, is coming ever closer.
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I suspect a lot of us are thinking the same about you with your ill judged and unwarrented personal attacks on Mrs C
Mrs C, economically things worked pretty well (although it's telling that the single market was completed in areas other than finance).
We've got to make a choice, ultimately.
Yes Mr Dancer - we do have to make a choice.
I find it remarkable that someone like me who spent years as a mild BOO-er has now shifted to the pro-EU side of the fence and it is Brexit that made me shift. Our handling of Brexit is just making me more and more convinced that the UK is no longer fit for purpose. It is time for Federal Europe. We need to shift our viewpoint to a more integrationist role were we, the Germans and the Nordic countries take control of the EU and liberalise it.
That seems to me to be a grander vision than retreating to a 1957 Mk2 Peak Blighty.
Yes, you have moved over to the dark side and embraced treason, betrayal and double-crossed thinking. And now you feel qualified to gleefully hurl insults the other way, in a childish and petulant manner.
I have far more respect for Labour/Tory Remainers and posters on here than you.
Nobody likes a turncoat that turns enthusiastically on ones former allies. My opinion of you couldn't be lower.
I am sitting here watching my country hurtle down the road to oblivion and you are chiding me because I do not believe in "My country - right or wrong"? I am supposed to have a stiff upper lip and put on my diamonds and best gown and discuss the weather with tuxedo clad gents whilst the ship sinks under us all?
Get over yourself. The 19th Century is long gone.
Brexit is about the future, not the past.
If you weren't such a hyperbolic dimwit, you'd recognise that.
Deluded thinking. The future is about greater and closer international co-operation, and Brexit is Britain (England) trying to stop the world and get off.
Bollocks.
If you listened to Gove, Hannan, Carswell, or Cummings, you'd know that Brexit is about more globalisation, not less, and sees the EU as the past, not the future.
So many knobs on here totally obsessed with their own parodies of Brexit and their own stupid characterisations of it.
You are confusing the idle dreaming of a few proponents with the reality of the consequences of the decision we have taken. Sadly for us and for our country, the stupid characterisations of Brexit are mostly coming from its advocates.
Comments
Mind blown: Algeria.
This what happens when the revolution eats itself.
https://twitter.com/eurelationsappg
https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomchivers/these-scientists-say-brexit-is-a-mess-for-british-nuclear?utm_term=.luaDJjogX#.erx5nRJel
Right now, no-one knows.
On Boris, he ticks the charisma box, but that is just about all. He, along with May and Gove, are responsible for repelling professional, middle class and business voters with the kind of outcome we saw in Kensington, to name but one example.
As for Boris he twice won Labour London and the EU referendum and as far as general election 2017 the Tories still won 318 seats and while they lost Kensington they won Middlesbourough South and Cleveland for example, it was not all 1 way traffic
Colour me unconvinced.
Oh, wait...
Prat.
I find Corbyn's Labour deeply cynical on this. In what Labour world of trying to raise equality is this a priority? It mainly benefits the middle class and will cost billions at the expense of good stuff like, say SureStart or FE colleges, which would do more for raising education attainment.
Corbyn has majored on this, not because it is the most progressive, equalising thing to do with £11b, but because it gets votes from young people and their parents.
The modest gains in the north are satisfying but the loss of Kensington is emblematic of a far more serious fracture in the Tory coalition. May's performance was far worse than it looks because only Scotland saved the party (and the country) from total disaster.
Thing is, Jezza is operating in violation of Economics Rule #1: resources are scarce.
Another day closer to us not leaving...
"Corbyn is right, because the country has too much debt"
Ummm....
Firstly, you've confused vote Leave and Leave.EU and second Cummings does not favour Remaining in any way whatsoever.
Only idiotic morons like you who insist on misrepresenting him believe so.
- see for instance: https://www.hesa.ac.uk/news/19-01-2017/sfr243-staff
but not sure how far back.
I wonder why...
Mr. P, I didn't single out either side for praise or blame.
"Buckingham is ranked 1st in the UK in the Complete University Guide for student satisfaction, and joint 2nd for staff-to-student ratios. A 2-year degree structure is based on 4 terms a year rather than 3, with 13 weeks of vacation rather than 22 weeks. This means less debt, more focus."
I run a medical technology company that is part of the global supply chain and trades heavily with Switzerland. Can this country go it alone? Yes of course. Is it a good idea? Almost certainly not and especially not if done rapidly.
The transition will overall provide losers but within that there will be some big losers and some winners. My company is probably a winner. We already see international competition losing interest in the UK market allowing us to quote pretty much what we want.
To offset that we have more costs and mostly they come from the Government's desperate search for money. Not only are business property taxes in the UK a joke but we also get hit with most of the costs of stupid ideas such as Hinckley. I just signed a £650 PO to get the UK Government to review a submission to allow me to continue testing water. This is for a half day audit by a demotivated public servant. The UK uses regulations as a way to tax business. Leaving the EC will lead to more regulations not fewer.
If you do feel grumpy, just remember how magnificent my 250/1 Verstappen winning tip was, and that's bound to cheer you up.
The Panorama programme tonight is a perfect example.
But that won't happen as it would disadvantage all the posh kids reading Geography at Oxford before joining the BBC or a bank.
Garcia 3.2 / 3.3
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/tennis/market/1.132534394
Nobody voted to leave the EU because they didn't like Euratom, so I'd have thought some kind of arrangement can easily be sorted - provided of course TM doesn't go full headbanger on this ECJ thing.
Didn't the government do a similar climb down on European patents and the ECJ? I think Southam Observer wrote an article on it...
That said, there is no doubt that most people attend university with an eye to a future career, and if people feel the debt incurred is not worth it then we really ought to be asking what would be worth it beyond a snap "free" education answer. More vocational qualifications, more apprenticeships, degrees taken alongside employment, there must be all sorts of ways of making higher education both more affordable and more valuable to the person studying.
If we're going to talk about priorities for public spending, it's not police offices, nurses or teachers it's prisons:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40519755
Isn't the big picture on Brexit that there is no majority for any particular outcome either in parliament or in the country (with the POSSIBLE exception if you believe certain polls of a national majority for remain now.)
How is that having won the referendum by capturing a national mood, the winning side have made no progress in convincing those who didn't vote for it that it won't be a disaster? You can see it in the comments here and elsewhere - surely the biggest mistake of May has been charging on with 'citizens of nowhere' when she needed to unite the country not just double down the division? For me she got her just desserts in the general election as a result. To those who've always been in favour of Brexit and still holding the line - how will you take the country with you? Feels that the referendum mandate is paper thin now and this is the thinking needed to keep the country together.
r. But there isn't.
At times like those a skilled politician at the helm is more vital than ever.
You suggested Hague. I think he is as good as we are likely to get. Path to No 10 : upgrade to Hereditary Peer - stand in byelection - coronation.
ell keep May for now
Hague was in a hopeless position 1997 - 2001, the very worst point in May,
Ixit)
There is simply no comparison between the 2001 GE ane example.
Haguy leader for a 100 years, he was fine as a Cabinet Minister but I traffic
You could have said something similar about Attlee in 1935 and Churchill in total disaster.
May had a better rating than Cameron in Scotland so that helped there. However Leave vote
Save the pound is ancient history - practically no one wants to join the Euro. In fact that campaign is already long won, and Hague deserves some credit for it, even though he lost in 2001. The poor election results this year were partly a consequence of a REMAIN backlash. There is no one less equipped than Boris to counter that.
The poor results were due to the Dementia Tax, ending the triple lock and austerity not a 'Remain backlash' and Boris will largely reverse much of that anyway. Having had a door slammed in my face in 2001 when asked how a voter was voting and being told 'not for that twat' I fail to see how 16 years later he is suddenly a great vote winner for the party. It was Boris who twice won in Labour London and Boris who largely won the referendum for Leave, in a contest between Boris and Hague to be leader there is no contest. Hague can play a role in the negotiations but as a Tory member I would not consider him as a future leader and I doubt he would want it either
Hague as leader would almost be as bad as Jacob Rees Mogg.
It's Hammond for me. I think Boris has been found out.
Get over yourself. The 19th Century is long gone.
If you weren't such a hyperbolic dimwit, you'd recognise that.
Feels that we could all do with turning the temperature down a notch - I found the site much more readable over the GE, even though I didn't post much I still lurk a lot.
There's only so much money it makes sense to spend on health, education, social care and childcare. Because, whilst important, there is more to a good quality of life than just those things, and at the very least many ways of them being delivered.
The trouble with "all tax is good" is that you eventually get to a point where compulsorily confiscating the revenues of the economy, and then deciding how to spend them centrally, entrenches existing practice and leads to a lack of innovation, and dynamism stagnation and malaise within the producers, and dependency amongst the consumers.
Mind your own business.
However, I agree prison reform is an urgent issue. And I'm depressed the Government hasn't done more in this area.
I suspect the real issue is that it's not a politically resonant area in which to spend limited public funds.
Can you imagine having to work as one of those poor prison officers?
It must be one of the worst jobs in the country.
A few years ago the most popular A level for girls was psychology (not sure of its ranking now).
Well an A level in psychology leads to a degree in psychology...
"While those with an undergraduate degree in psychology do not have all of the job options available as those with a master's or doctorate in psychology, there are many entry-level jobs for college graduates with a bachelor's degree. These career options might initially appear to have little to do with the field of psychology."
then better get a master's degree...
"However, students are often unaware of exactly what they can do with their master's degrees post-graduation. Some students might opt to pursue their master's as a step toward a doctorate."
already £80,000 in debt, a PhD would bring that to £140,000. Perhaps have to say enough, just another year of teacher training then - a more reasonable total of £100,000 and only 7 years of study - and back to the beginning.
If you listened to Gove, Hannan, Carswell, or Cummings, you'd know that Brexit is about more globalisation, not less, and sees the EU as the past, not the future.
So many knobs on here totally obsessed with their own parodies of Brexit and their own stupid characterisations of it.