Nottinghamshire surprises me . Anyway it is Breakfast, lunch then tea as per the cricket.
Calling the evening meal “tea” is the sign of a savage.
The first time I was selected as a candidate, I'd never been to Notts before, and had been living abroad. I had a meal in a cafe and noticed that they offered mushy peas. I thought this was an honest confession - didn't realise anyone actually thought it a good thing.
Kevin Schofield - @PolhomeEditor: Unison's Wendy Nichols has been elected vice-chair of Labour National Executive Committee, beating Andi Fox of the TSSA 18-17 at today's NEC meeting. Jeremy Corbyn dialled into the meeting to vote for Fox, who was also backed by Momentum.
They have not been voted in, and they could not be voted in until they had met the AC - which, as I show above, was happening very slowly.
I look forward to you attending your next job interview and, as a candidate, asking for the keys to the executive washroom and for your name on a parking space as you shake their hands at the end.
In fact, Turkey weren't even at the interview stage. They were a pimply 12-year old Geek sending a letter to join NASA, and being told: "Sure, we'd love to consider you, but only when you pass all your exams and meet all these other criteria."
(worst. analogy. ever.)
I would only expect keys, parking space etc (if they go with the job) once I'd joined not before. Nobody said that Turkey had joined the EU.
Yet you think they were 'joining', despite all the evidence to the contrary. They were negotiating to join, which is a very different thing.
If they were 'joining', as you think, then what was their date of entry?
Just listening to Tony Blair on Radio 4. Don't we miss him. So articulate. So persuasive.
'Boris Johnson has been touring Argentina Chile and Peru. We do less than 6% of the trade with these countries than we do .......with Ireland'
'Lets get this in perspective. We do less trade with Australia Canada New Zealand and India than we do....... with Holland'
He believes that another referendum would reverse the result because the issues weren't understood and now we've delved into them the issues can be simply explained.
Tone is a strange case. Maggie was always loathed/loved in equal measure. But to go, as Tone did, from being universally adored to a political pariah in a few years is surely unprecedented. (Even Richard Nixon had his defenders.) Was it just about Iraq? How would Tone be viewed now if he had told Dubya to take a leap all those years ago?
Would Dubya have gone ahead?
Almost certainly yes: the NeoCons were convinced they could alter the course of human history towards goodness and light. It was a seductive potion many sipped.
Sort of like pro-Europeans view of Europe as a force for good.
Yes, it's ironic that NeoCons like Liam Fox were happy to model their plans for the Middle East on post-war European liberalism whilst wanting to extricate Britain from the same. There was almost a kind of Orwellian double-think going on.
It’s not just school curricula that is being simplified is it? Who thought that was a useful explanation?
Just what is wrong with it ?
At heart the deficit is a very simply concept.
You don’t find that patronising? Wow.
It doesn't get into the difference between borrowing and deficit, omits mention of the difference between capital and current spend but for a simple explanation of the "deficit" it is fine. Are you in a line of work where overcomplication is required or some such ?
iain watson - @iainjwatson: The contest to replace Jennie Formby as vice chair of the #labour NEC has concluded - two union candidates contested it but I am hearing the one seem as closer to the leadership (andi fox of TSSA) has been very narrowly defeated by Wendy Nichols of UNISON
Just listening to Tony Blair on Radio 4. Don't we miss him. So articulate. So persuasive.
'Boris Johnson has been touring Argentina Chile and Peru. We do less than 6% of the trade with these countries than we do .......with Ireland'
'Lets get this in perspective. We do less trade with Australia Canada New Zealand and India than we do....... with Holland'
He believes that another referendum would reverse the result because the issues weren't understood and now we've delved into them the issues can be simply explained.
Tone is a strange case. Maggie was always loathed/loved in equal measure. But to go, as Tone did, from being universally adored to a political pariah in a few years is surely unprecedented. (Even Richard Nixon had his defenders.) Was it just about Iraq? How would Tone be viewed now if he had told Dubya to take a leap all those years ago?
I think a lot of people (many of them Tories) feel they were made a fool of. That always ramps up the loathing & vengeful anger rate.
It’s not just school curricula that is being simplified is it? Who thought that was a useful explanation?
Just what is wrong with it ?
At heart the deficit is a very simply concept.
You don’t find that patronising? Wow.
It doesn't get into the difference between borrowing and deficit, omits mention of the difference between capital and current spend but for a simple explanation of the "deficit" it is fine. Are you in a line of work where overcomplication is required or some such ?
They have not been voted in, and they could not be voted in until they had met the AC - which, as I show above, was happening very slowly.
I look forward to you attending your next job interview and, as a candidate, asking for the keys to the executive washroom and for your name on a parking space as you shake their hands at the end.
In fact, Turkey weren't even at the interview stage. They were a pimply 12-year old Geek sending a letter to join NASA, and being told: "Sure, we'd love to consider you, but only when you pass all your exams and meet all these other criteria."
(worst. analogy. ever.)
I would only expect keys, parking space etc (if they go with the job) once I'd joined not before. Nobody said that Turkey had joined the EU.
Yet you think they were 'joining', despite all the evidence to the contrary. They were negotiating to join, which is a very different thing.
If they were 'joining', as you think, then what was their date of entry?
There was no date set, they were in the negotiations stage of the joining procedure.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
BTW, is it worth reflecting that the same people who predict that we will be tenths of a percent worse off in a decade or so were more than 10% out in their forecast of our deficit a single month away from the end of the financial year?
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
I think I've seen our own Mr Herdson say the most frustrating thing about 2001 was the poor targeting of seats. If the Tories had been more cautious in their targeting, they could have picked up a few more seats.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
You have to campaign on 'something'. In 2001, Labour were still very much in honeymoon period even 4 years after being in power. Better to have someting simple to build something around, even if its not much.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
Hague in 2001 had an impossible job, rather like Foot in 1983, Blair like Thatcher then was re elected easily but Hague at least got the Tory base out and ensured the Tories did not fall even further from their 1997 nadir
If the Tories want to get beaten like morning wood then they’ll call a snap election as they fracture over Brexit.
You can see them having individual manifestos.
JRM and the ERG have their own diamond hard Brexit manifesto whilst the likes of NiMo and Grieve fight on a personal manifesto of soft/EEA Brexit.
You could say exactly the same about Labour and the differing personal manifestos of Kate Hoey and John Mann backing hard Brexit and Chuka Umunna and Ben Bradshaw backing the EEA/second EU referendum
Just listening to Tony Blair on Radio 4. Don't we miss him. So articulate. So persuasive.
'Boris Johnson has been touring Argentina Chile and Peru. We do less than 6% of the trade with these countries than we do .......with Ireland'
'Lets get this in perspective. We do less trade with Australia Canada New Zealand and India than we do....... with Holland'
He believes that another referendum would reverse the result because the issues weren't understood and now we've delved into them the issues can be simply explained.
Tone is a strange case. Maggie was always loathed/loved in equal measure. But to go, as Tone did, from being universally adored to a political pariah in a few years is surely unprecedented. (Even Richard Nixon had his defenders.) Was it just about Iraq? How would Tone be viewed now if he had told Dubya to take a leap all those years ago?
We are all used to politicians being lying bastards, it is their function. But for the PM of this country to lie to the HoC and the country about intelligence to persuade us to go to war was unforgivable. He should have gone to jail.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
I think Hague was on a hiding to nothing. In 1997 the public had rather decided that it would give New Labour an eight year shot at things, almost as a gesture of goodwill after all those years in the wilderness. 2001 was nothing more than a rubber-stamping exercise.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
You have to campaign on 'something'. In 2001, Labour were still very much in honeymoon period even 4 years after being in power. Better to have someting simple to build something around, even if its not much.
You don't build a Tory election campaign around what is already Labour policy. Vote for us, we'll do the same as them? Page 94 of the manifesto, perhaps, along with the motherhood and apple pie stuff but not the central campaign.
Just listening to Tony Blair on Radio 4. Don't we miss him. So articulate. So persuasive.
'Boris Johnson has been touring Argentina Chile and Peru. We do less than 6% of the trade with these countries than we do .......with Ireland'
'Lets get this in perspective. We do less trade with Australia Canada New Zealand and India than we do....... with Holland'
'We do less trade with the whole Commonwealth than we do with Germany....'
He believes that another referendum would reverse the result because the issues weren't understood and now we've delved into them the issues can be simply explained.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
You have to campaign on 'something'. In 2001, Labour were still very much in honeymoon period even 4 years after being in power. Better to have someting simple to build something around, even if its not much.
You don't build a Tory election campaign around what is already Labour policy. Vote for us, we'll do the same as them? Page 94 of the manifesto, perhaps, along with the motherhood and apple pie stuff but not the central campaign.
The failure of the pro Euro Conservative Party shows there was no point Hague taking a different line
First hit in a search for new countries joining the eu:
Joining the EU Albania. Bosnia and Herzegovina. Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Kosovo* Montenegro. Serbia. Turkey.
Useful guidance on the ordinary meaning of "joining", from the eu website . All this desperate stuff to the contrary is like saying on saturday morning that harry was not marrying meghan because he might be but what if someone piped up with a just impediment?
But anyway the gravamen of the Turkey charge is not that it was false, surely? If we could amend xenophobic liar to xenophobic mischief maker on the standard charge sheet we wouldn't have to keep having this particular argument.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
You have to campaign on 'something'. In 2001, Labour were still very much in honeymoon period even 4 years after being in power. Better to have someting simple to build something around, even if its not much.
You don't build a Tory election campaign around what is already Labour policy. Vote for us, we'll do the same as them? Page 94 of the manifesto, perhaps, along with the motherhood and apple pie stuff but not the central campaign.
The failure of the pro Euro Conservative Party shows there was no point Hague taking a different line
This is in a country where the abortion debate has for many years featured arguments concerning sometimes hypothetical and sometimes real examples involving extreme and especially emotive cases such as raped nuns and victims of under-age and incestuous rape. The debate has not moved on from that stage and it is often argued like that rather than with reference to the much more common experience where a woman who has become pregnant after consensual sex with her boyfriend or husband - and after the failure of contraception rather than its non-use - undergoes the stress and expense of travelling to GB for an abortion, or who has to break the law by using an abortifacient she has ordered online from abroad.
It is not good for the Yes side that they feel they have to complain about how the No side are campaigning - especially when both sides have presented their arguments with reference to especially harrowing cases.
The Yes side, while still ahead in the polls, appear to be on the back foot or even on the run. The remaining TV debates of today and tomorrow look as though they will be interesting. If the narrative between now and Friday continues to be one of "Look what you'll be responsible for if you vote for repeal" from No and "You're not campaigning nicely" from Yes, then No are in with a good chance.
Mr. Glenn, no. Despite what EU-philes might dream of, the UK never wanted to throw away our currency and monetary policy.
Why do you think Hague's 2001 general election campaign was such an abject failure? (Several orders of magnitude worse than May 2017.)
In part because people didn't think there was a genuine chance of Britain joining the Euro.
Times change.
Hague's campaign ranks with Lord Lucan's whereabouts as one of the great mysteries of the age. Hague campaigned against joining the Euro -- which had already been ruled out by Labour. Did Hague not read the newspapers? Then, allegedly, CCHQ would filter out honest but adverse reports so Hague never learned how badly this was going down on the doorstep.
You have to campaign on 'something'. In 2001, Labour were still very much in honeymoon period even 4 years after being in power. Better to have someting simple to build something around, even if its not much.
You don't build a Tory election campaign around what is already Labour policy. Vote for us, we'll do the same as them? Page 94 of the manifesto, perhaps, along with the motherhood and apple pie stuff but not the central campaign.
The failure of the pro Euro Conservative Party shows there was no point Hague taking a different line
Unspoofable!
No, ask John Stevens MEP how he did at the 1999 European elections and the 2001 general election .
He and most of the Pro Euro Conservative Party won 0 seats in both elections and both Stevens and most of his supporters ended up in the LDs by the end of 2001
Nottinghamshire surprises me . Anyway it is Breakfast, lunch then tea as per the cricket.
Calling the evening meal “tea” is the sign of a savage.
The first time I was selected as a candidate, I'd never been to Notts before, and had been living abroad. I had a meal in a cafe and noticed that they offered mushy peas. I thought this was an honest confession - didn't realise anyone actually thought it a good thing.
This is in a country where the abortion debate has for many years featured arguments concerning sometimes hypothetical and sometimes real examples involving extreme and especially emotive cases such as raped nuns and victims of under-age and incestuous rape. The debate has not moved on from that stage and it is often argued like that rather than with reference to the much more common experience where a woman who has become pregnant after consensual sex with her boyfriend or husband - and after the failure of contraception rather than its non-use - undergoes the stress and expense of travelling to GB for an abortion, or who has to break the law by using an abortifacient she has ordered online from abroad.
It is not good for the Yes side that they feel they have to complain about how the No side are campaigning - especially when both sides have presented their arguments with reference to especially harrowing cases.
The Yes side, while still ahead in the polls, appear to be on the back foot or even on the run. The remaining TV debates of today and tomorrow look as though they will be interesting. If the narrative between now and Friday continues to be one of "Look what you'll be responsible for if you vote for repeal" from No and "You're not campaigning nicely" from Yes, then No are in with a good chance.
First hit in a search for new countries joining the eu:
Joining the EU Albania. Bosnia and Herzegovina. Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Kosovo* Montenegro. Serbia. Turkey.
Useful guidance on the ordinary meaning of "joining", from the eu website . All this desperate stuff to the contrary is like saying on saturday morning that harry was not marrying meghan because he might be but what if someone piped up with a just impediment?
But anyway the gravamen of the Turkey charge is not that it was false, surely? If we could amend xenophobic liar to xenophobic mischief maker on the standard charge sheet we wouldn't have to keep having this particular argument.
Remember these countries are only joining if we aren't having a referendum - otherwise it's xenophobic lies to suggest we aren't stringing them along.
This is in a country where the abortion debate has for many years featured arguments concerning sometimes hypothetical and sometimes real examples involving extreme and especially emotive cases such as raped nuns and victims of under-age and incestuous rape. The debate has not moved on from that stage and it is often argued like that rather than with reference to the much more common experience where a woman who has become pregnant after consensual sex with her boyfriend or husband - and after the failure of contraception rather than its non-use - undergoes the stress and expense of travelling to GB for an abortion, or who has to break the law by using an abortifacient she has ordered online from abroad.
It is not good for the Yes side that they feel they have to complain about how the No side are campaigning - especially when both sides have presented their arguments with reference to especially harrowing cases.
The Yes side, while still ahead in the polls, appear to be on the back foot or even on the run. The remaining TV debates of today and tomorrow look as though they will be interesting. If the narrative between now and Friday continues to be one of "Look what you'll be responsible for if you vote for repeal" from No and "You're not campaigning nicely" from Yes, then No are in with a good chance.
I think Yes will win 2:1.
I think Yes will win but by less than the gay marriage referendum
I was surprised that John Bercow couldn't bring himself to apologise, if not for his behaviour tout court then at least in a mealymouthed way for causing offence or for his tone of voice. He just didn't apologise at all and effectively said that the word stupid "was used" (who by - Father Christmas?) because he was doing his duty to stand up for the common good of the House and the British people. He's not cutting a very good picture at the moment.
First hit in a search for new countries joining the eu:
Joining the EU Albania. Bosnia and Herzegovina. Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Kosovo* Montenegro. Serbia. Turkey.
Useful guidance on the ordinary meaning of "joining", from the eu website . All this desperate stuff to the contrary is like saying on saturday morning that harry was not marrying meghan because he might be but what if someone piped up with a just impediment?
But anyway the gravamen of the Turkey charge is not that it was false, surely? If we could amend xenophobic liar to xenophobic mischief maker on the standard charge sheet we wouldn't have to keep having this particular argument.
Your link actually calls them “candidate countries” and points out that joining is not a straightforward linear process.
Nottinghamshire surprises me . Anyway it is Breakfast, lunch then tea as per the cricket.
Calling the evening meal “tea” is the sign of a savage.
The first time I was selected as a candidate, I'd never been to Notts before, and had been living abroad. I had a meal in a cafe and noticed that they offered mushy peas. I thought this was an honest confession - didn't realise anyone actually thought it a good thing.
I acclimatised, and now positively prefer them.
I love mushy peas.
I despise mushy peas. I love garden peas, but mushy peas just make my stomach turn. As for curry sauce... bleugh.
This is in a country where the abortion debate has for many years featured arguments concerning sometimes hypothetical and sometimes real examples involving extreme and especially emotive cases such as raped nuns and victims of under-age and incestuous rape. The debate has not moved on from that stage and it is often argued like that rather than with reference to the much more common experience where a woman who has become pregnant after consensual sex with her boyfriend or husband - and after the failure of contraception rather than its non-use - undergoes the stress and expense of travelling to GB for an abortion, or who has to break the law by using an abortifacient she has ordered online from abroad.
It is not good for the Yes side that they feel they have to complain about how the No side are campaigning - especially when both sides have presented their arguments with reference to especially harrowing cases.
The Yes side, while still ahead in the polls, appear to be on the back foot or even on the run. The remaining TV debates of today and tomorrow look as though they will be interesting. If the narrative between now and Friday continues to be one of "Look what you'll be responsible for if you vote for repeal" from No and "You're not campaigning nicely" from Yes, then No are in with a good chance.
I think Yes will win 2:1.
I think Yes will win but by less than the gay marriage referendum
Gay marriage had 62% in favour. I will be surprised if it is any closer than that. The Catholic Church is nothing like the power it was.
....the public have become more positive about immigration. Far fewer see it as a major political priority and more see it as positive for Britain’s economy and culture. What is more, this shift is seen across the board — it isn’t a case of liberal “Remainers” rallying behind migrants, while migrant sceptic “Leavers” dig in their heels. The positive shift in attitudes seems to be occurring across the political and social spectrum.
....why isn’t this shift more widely known and discussed on the pro-migration, “Remain” side of politics. Here I must resort to anecdote and unrepresentative data a little, but it is my firm impression that politically active “Remainers” and migration liberals tend to believe things have become worse since Brexit......It does seem that the conventional wisdom among this unusually well informed and engaged group is that migration attitudes have hardened since Brexit. Yet the evidence robustly points in the opposite direction
This is in a country where the abortion debate has for many years featured arguments concerning sometimes hypothetical and sometimes real examples involving extreme and especially emotive cases such as raped nuns and victims of under-age and incestuous rape. The debate has not moved on from that stage and it is often argued like that rather than with reference to the much more common experience where a woman who has become pregnant after consensual sex with her boyfriend or husband - and after the failure of contraception rather than its non-use - undergoes the stress and expense of travelling to GB for an abortion, or who has to break the law by using an abortifacient she has ordered online from abroad.
It is not good for the Yes side that they feel they have to complain about how the No side are campaigning - especially when both sides have presented their arguments with reference to especially harrowing cases.
The Yes side, while still ahead in the polls, appear to be on the back foot or even on the run. The remaining TV debates of today and tomorrow look as though they will be interesting. If the narrative between now and Friday continues to be one of "Look what you'll be responsible for if you vote for repeal" from No and "You're not campaigning nicely" from Yes, then No are in with a good chance.
I think Yes will win 2:1.
I think Yes will win but by less than the gay marriage referendum
Gay marriage had 62% in favour. I will be surprised if it is any closer than that. The Catholic Church is nothing like the power it was.
Apparently not in NI either if that unification poll is anything to go by.
Nottinghamshire surprises me . Anyway it is Breakfast, lunch then tea as per the cricket.
Calling the evening meal “tea” is the sign of a savage.
The first time I was selected as a candidate, I'd never been to Notts before, and had been living abroad. I had a meal in a cafe and noticed that they offered mushy peas. I thought this was an honest confession - didn't realise anyone actually thought it a good thing.
I acclimatised, and now positively prefer them.
I love mushy peas.
I despise mushy peas. I love garden peas, but mushy peas just make my stomach turn. As for curry sauce... bleugh.
Mushy peas with mint sauce and hot pork pie is divine
First hit in a search for new countries joining the eu:
Joining the EU Albania. Bosnia and Herzegovina. Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Kosovo* Montenegro. Serbia. Turkey.
Useful guidance on the ordinary meaning of "joining", from the eu website . All this desperate stuff to the contrary is like saying on saturday morning that harry was not marrying meghan because he might be but what if someone piped up with a just impediment?
But anyway the gravamen of the Turkey charge is not that it was false, surely? If we could amend xenophobic liar to xenophobic mischief maker on the standard charge sheet we wouldn't have to keep having this particular argument.
Your link actually calls them “candidate countries” and points out that joining is not a straightforward linear process.
Yes of course it does. Which doesn't alter its validity as evidence that a fair one word summary for the situation of all those countries - all of them including Turkey a thousand miles behind where Turkey was in June 2016 - is "joining".
EU - "Turkey are joining the EU" Turkey - "We are joining the EU" UK - "We support Turkey joining the EU"
Vote Leave - "Turkey are joining the EU"
Remain - "XENOPHOBIC LIES!"
Ah - you were just stupid enough to believe what Cameron said - all the clever remainers knew he was lying. That's why you are Xenophobic and they aren't..
EU - "Turkey are joining the EU" Turkey - "We are joining the EU" UK - "We support Turkey joining the EU"
Vote Leave - "Turkey are joining the EU"
Remain - "XENOPHOBIC LIES!"
Well, remainers and Eurocrats need to differentiate their lies from the other side and this is their mode of choice. It’s a therapy thing and unkind to be too harsh about it.
BTW how are you and I able to give a better forecast of the deficit than the Treasury? I think we both said it would be about £40bn. It’s almost like some there have an agenda.
Some people in Edinburgh put brown sauce on their fish and chips. I mean, how weird is that?
I thought the Belgian habit of dunking their chips in mayonnaise pretty gross.....until I tried it......very much in the philosophy of 'might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb'....
My cousin has just announced she's having her wedding in Cornwall so everyone is heading down there in mid August. We've got a free day on Sunday (wedding on Saturday) and we're fairly certain my uncle isn't going to host anything on that day.
We're going to be in Liskegard, any recommendations for for dinner/tea/supper (have I missed any?) on the way back to London?
They have not been voted in, and they could not be voted in until they had met the AC - which, as I show above, was happening very slowly.
I look forward to you attending your next job interview and, as a candidate, asking for the keys to the executive washroom and for your name on a parking space as you shake their hands at the end.
In fact, Turkey weren't even at the interview stage. They were a pimply 12-year old Geek sending a letter to join NASA, and being told: "Sure, we'd love to consider you, but only when you pass all your exams and meet all these other criteria."
(worst. analogy. ever.)
I would only expect keys, parking space etc (if they go with the job) once I'd joined not before. Nobody said that Turkey had joined the EU.
Yet you think they were 'joining', despite all the evidence to the contrary. They were negotiating to join, which is a very different thing.
If they were 'joining', as you think, then what was their date of entry?
There was no date set, they were in the negotiations stage of the joining procedure.
So we are getting somewhere. You see it as a 'joining procedure' meaning, in your mind, that they were joining. That is patently wrong.
If you pass an interview, get an offer, and accept that offer, then you are 'joining' the company. You are not 'joining' it at the interview stage, and Turkey were not even at that point.
It was actually a negotiations process, with an uncertain end result. Saying they were 'joining' implies a certainty. You could say that they wish to join, or that the EU wished them to join (although both of those may or may not be correct); you cannot say they were 'joining'.
Turkey would only be 'joining' once the negotiations are complete and the votes carried out. That never happened, and was very unlikely to.
EU - "Turkey are joining the EU" Turkey - "We are joining the EU" UK - "We support Turkey joining the EU"
Vote Leave - "Turkey are joining the EU"
Remain - "XENOPHOBIC LIES!"
Well, remainers and Eurocrats need to differentiate their lies from the other side and this is their mode of choice. It’s a therapy thing and unkind to be too harsh about it.
BTW how are you and I able to give a better forecast of the deficit than the Treasury? I think we both said it would be about £40bn. It’s almost like some there have an agenda.
Yes, it is turning into their security blanket.
I was very surprised when the OBR projected that PSNBex would be £45bn in March. They have access to much more data than us plebs and they were still out by £5bn within a month of the data being released.
The issue, IMO, is the poor quality of statistics from the ONS and whoever they have working on the national accounts/GDP. It's pretty clear that Q1 growth was somewhere around 0.3%. I'd be wary of saying it's a politically motivated agenda, however, given that debt keeps getting revised down and GDP up it's becoming difficult to see how it could be anything else.
EU - "Turkey are joining the EU" Turkey - "We are joining the EU" UK - "We support Turkey joining the EU"
Vote Leave - "Turkey are joining the EU"
Remain - "XENOPHOBIC LIES!"
It's the LIES bit that puzzles me. A wholehearted remainer would surely welcome the accession of millions of very poor Muslims to The Project as making it even more glorious than it is now. Unless they have something against Muslims...
Comments
https://www.ecb.co.uk/news/526479
That Lammy letter looks bloody horrendous.
I acclimatised, and now positively prefer them.
If they were 'joining', as you think, then what was their date of entry?
Are you in a line of work where overcomplication is required or some such ?
Is it possible we have passed Peak Corbyn?
Times change.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/998889832859529216
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/business-papers/commons/early-day-motions/edm-detail1/?edmnumber=943&session=2016-17
You might as well call your evening meal ‘coffee’ or ‘pineapple juice’
You can see them having individual manifestos.
JRM and the ERG have their own diamond hard Brexit manifesto whilst the likes of NiMo and Grieve fight on a personal manifesto of soft/EEA Brexit.
How do you pronounce
a) Bath (as in the town)
b) bath where you wash yourself
Con 315 (-3)
Lab 259 (-3)
LD 16 (+4)
Con 11 short of a majority. Basically no change.
Joining the EU
Albania.
Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
Kosovo*
Montenegro.
Serbia.
Turkey.
Useful guidance on the ordinary meaning of "joining", from the eu website . All this desperate stuff to the contrary is like saying on saturday morning that harry was not marrying meghan because he might be but what if someone piped up with a just impediment?
But anyway the gravamen of the Turkey charge is not that it was false, surely? If we could amend xenophobic liar to xenophobic mischief maker on the standard charge sheet we wouldn't have to keep having this particular argument.
I wasn’t allowed to go to football matches, Liverpool were the only team on the telly, plus my Dad liked them too.
You can change your job, citizenship, name, heck you can even change your wife but you can never change the football team you support.
This is in a country where the abortion debate has for many years featured arguments concerning sometimes hypothetical and sometimes real examples involving extreme and especially emotive cases such as raped nuns and victims of under-age and incestuous rape. The debate has not moved on from that stage and it is often argued like that rather than with reference to the much more common experience where a woman who has become pregnant after consensual sex with her boyfriend or husband - and after the failure of contraception rather than its non-use - undergoes the stress and expense of travelling to GB for an abortion, or who has to break the law by using an abortifacient she has ordered online from abroad.
It is not good for the Yes side that they feel they have to complain about how the No side are campaigning - especially when both sides have presented their arguments with reference to especially harrowing cases.
The Yes side, while still ahead in the polls, appear to be on the back foot or even on the run. The remaining TV debates of today and tomorrow look as though they will be interesting. If the narrative between now and Friday continues to be one of "Look what you'll be responsible for if you vote for repeal" from No and "You're not campaigning nicely" from Yes, then No are in with a good chance.
Most people in Edinburgh put chip sauce on their fish supper, as God intended.
He and most of the Pro Euro Conservative Party won 0 seats in both elections and both Stevens and most of his supporters ended up in the LDs by the end of 2001
Did you do a Sol Campbell ?
Is the chip sauce not brown sauce then? It looks like it.
Philistine
Even as an ex student of Edinburgh Uni I find it the devil's food.
This is vinegar country.
Both blighted by the SNP, Yes vote and vinegar...
https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countries_en
EU - "Turkey are joining the EU"
Turkey - "We are joining the EU"
UK - "We support Turkey joining the EU"
Vote Leave - "Turkey are joining the EU"
Remain - "XENOPHOBIC LIES!"
BTW how are you and I able to give a better forecast of the deficit than the Treasury? I think we both said it would be about £40bn. It’s almost like some there have an agenda.
If I moved up north I'd go back to supporting them.
We're going to be in Liskegard, any recommendations for for dinner/tea/supper (have I missed any?) on the way back to London?
If you pass an interview, get an offer, and accept that offer, then you are 'joining' the company. You are not 'joining' it at the interview stage, and Turkey were not even at that point.
It was actually a negotiations process, with an uncertain end result. Saying they were 'joining' implies a certainty. You could say that they wish to join, or that the EU wished them to join (although both of those may or may not be correct); you cannot say they were 'joining'.
Turkey would only be 'joining' once the negotiations are complete and the votes carried out. That never happened, and was very unlikely to.
I was very surprised when the OBR projected that PSNBex would be £45bn in March. They have access to much more data than us plebs and they were still out by £5bn within a month of the data being released.
The issue, IMO, is the poor quality of statistics from the ONS and whoever they have working on the national accounts/GDP. It's pretty clear that Q1 growth was somewhere around 0.3%. I'd be wary of saying it's a politically motivated agenda, however, given that debt keeps getting revised down and GDP up it's becoming difficult to see how it could be anything else.