Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A handbag is needed to break Brexit’s dialogue of the deaf

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited June 9 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A handbag is needed to break Brexit’s dialogue of the deaf

“Brexit means Brexit”, Theresa May once said – and if only it did. Leaving the European Union was never meant to be an easy thing and Britain is making a fine show of just how difficult it can be. The structural and procedural problems are, however, not even half the problem; the greater part of it is an inability of the government to meaningfully talk to the EU, to parliament or even to itself. So many people and institutions are thinking in ways that lie outside the parameters that the people they’re talking to are used to thinking within that Brexit has become a fog of mutual incomprehension as people simply talk past each other.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,605
    Thanks for the thread, David.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028
    I think the most important thing the government can do is to make actual concrete (literally) preparations for a No Deal Brexit.

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Flouncing without looking like you are actually ready for a No Deal Brexit doesn't buy you leverage.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,741
    What we need is for thirty or forty pro-Remain Labour MPs to resign their seats, good solid pro-Brexit Conservative MPs to be elected unopposed in the by-elections, the useless vacillating weak incompetent hubristic Mrs May to be ousted, Michael Gove to become Prime Minister, and a good hard Brexit to come into force immediately. No need to wait until 29th March 2019; no need for a two-year transition period or backstop or whatever-you-call-it.

    Oh, and the people of Europe will rise up, grasp the nettle by the horns, and the entire EU will crumble into dust so that the other 27 countries can be liberated as well.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,620
    edited June 9
    What we actually need is for the referendum results to be declared invalid because of cheating by the leave side on both expenses and untruthful statements made during the campaign
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,605
    edited June 9

    What we actually need is for the referendum results to be declared invalid because of cheating by the leave side on both expenses and untruthful statements made during the campaign

    On the spending front, here's a bit of context-- https://i.redd.it/cc19pq4y0xn01.jpg, and that doesn't count the £10mn on the pamphlet sent to all households.

    As for untruthful statements, what about the Treasury report? :p
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 21,542
    rcs1000 said:

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Goodbye UK.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,605

    rcs1000 said:

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Goodbye UK.
    twitter.com/SiobhanFenton/status/1004998281842298880
    Don't get too excited...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,338
    edited June 9
    As a professional negotiator for 25 years, I look upon the whole Brexit process with rising despair and anger, at the antics of both sides. Sure, Article 50 was designed to make it impossible to Leave. The Civil Service is trying its damndest to make it impossible to Leave. A significant portion of MPs are trying their damndest to find reasons to ignore their voters and not Leave, aided by the unelected House of Lords. But it comes down to direction from the top. The Prime Minister might have been a lukewarm Remainer, but she seems even cooler at having to implement Leave. We currently have the spectacle of a government instructed by the electorate to make beef sausages, but with the government staffing the sausage factory with vegetarians.

    Cameron's great failure in negotiating with the EU was that they never for a moment believed he would do anything to support Leave. And so he got a shit "renegotiation" that he could not sell to the people. And as a result, he delivered us Brexit.

    May's great failure in negotiating with the EU is that they never for a moment believe she will do anything to leave on WTO terms. And so she will get a shit "Brexit" that she will not sell as Brexit to the voters. And as a result, she will not deliver closure on Brexit, but rather a running sore that risks ripping up the current political party system and creating an Anti-establishment Party committed to doing the job properly, with a level of support that UKIP could only dream about.

    The EU would at least have believed that Boris would have gone full WTO. He is our Trump to their North Korea. And as a result, the likelihood of that WTO exit actually happening would have been less than now. We can argue later about whether Gove's decision to knife Boris's candidature is the reason our negotiation stance has been so poor, but that doesn't help the current process of getting a decent Brexit. As David says, May needs to get a grip, before her premiership ends in ignomy and the future for her party - and to be fair, that of Corbyn's - start to look very grim indeed. The voters have told our politicians to do one thing. Just one thing. Ignoring that instruction will have profound consequences. Don't make the voters angry. You won't like them when they get angry.

    Time for a big gesture. Go along to the next meeting with the EU. Have Boris produce a six foot by three foot comedy cheque for forty billion. Have him rip it up in front of them. Stand up, tell the EU they have to get more creative, or that is the last they see of their (already spent) forty billion. And go home.

    Oh, and we will be using some of that forty billion to fund anti-EU parties in upcoming elections....
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,896

    What we actually need is for the referendum results to be declared invalid because of cheating by the leave side on both expenses and untruthful statements made during the campaign

    Yes that would truly heal division - where would Lord Adonis make this unilateral declaration from?
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 991
    Wow, what a great OP. I think this paragraph perfectly sums up the situation and is one of the most insightful observations:

    Unfortunately, fudge is not what Brexiteers want. The Fudge Culture is exactly what they object to: of the diplomatic-ministerial class making agreements far above the people, whose votes mean little; the Project rolls on. Brexit was an explicit rejection of not just the Project but its methods. As such, a failure to disengage from either the methods or the EU itself will go down very badly. Indeed, such a deal will surely be unsaleable to those who believe in Brexit, or even many of those who believe in honouring the referendum result.

    I also agree with the conclusion.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,070

    As a professional negotiator for 25 years, I look upon the whole Brexit process with rising despair and anger, at the antics of both sides. Sure, Article 50 was designed to make it impossible to Leave. The Civil Service is trying its damndest to make it impossible to Leave. A significant portion of MPs are trying their damndest to find reasons to ignore their voters and not Leave, aided by the unelected House of Lords. But it comes down to direction from the top.

    Cameron's great failure in negotiating with the EU was that they never for a moment believed he would do anything to support Leave. And so he got a shit "renegotiation" that he could not sell to the people. And as a result, he delivered us Brexit.

    May's great failure in negotiating with the EU is that they never for a moment believe she will do anything to leave on WTO terms. And so she will get a shit "Brexit" that she will not sell as Brexit to the voters. And as a result, she will not deliver closure on Brexit, but rather a running sore that risks ripping up the current political party system and creating an Anti-establishment Party committed to doing the job properly, with a level of support that UKIP could only dream about.

    The EU would at least have believed that Boris would have gone full WTO. He is our Trump to their North Korea. And as a result, the likelihood of that WTO exit actually happening would have been less than now. We can argue later about whether Gove's decision to knife Boris's candidature is the reason our negotiation stance has been so poor, but that doesn't help the current process of getting a decent Brexit. As David says, May needs to get a grip, before her premiership ends in ignomy and the future for her party - and to be fair, that of Corbyn's - start to look very grim indeed. The voters have told our politicians to do one thing. Just one thing. Ignoring that instruction will have profound consequences. Don't make the voters angry. You won't like them when they get angry.

    Time for a big gesture. Go along to the next meeting with the EU. Have Boris produce a six foot by three foot comedy cheque for forty billion. Have him rip it up in front of them. Stand up, tell the EU they have to get more creative, or that is the last they see of their (already spent) forty billion. And go home.

    Oh, and we will be using some of that forty billion to fund anti-EU parties in upcoming elections....

    Yep, no two ways about it. May and her team are crap and no signs of achieving anything.

    There is no need to go all handbags though. WTO Brexit is the default, and all that is needed toget there is to do nothing and let the clock run down. If there is one thing that May is capable of, it is masterly inactivity, so WTO Brexit looks increasingly likely.

    It probably would be wise to make some belated plans for that event though.

  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,890

    What we actually need is for the referendum results to be declared invalid because of cheating by both sides on expenses and untruthful statements made during the campaign

    A better and more honest statement would be as highlighted above.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 991
    rcs1000 said:

    I think the most important thing the government can do is to make actual concrete (literally) preparations for a No Deal Brexit.

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Flouncing without looking like you are actually ready for a No Deal Brexit doesn't buy you leverage.

    You know I don't always agree with you, but you are talking plenty of sense here. A negotiation is not a battle of strength, it is a battle of expectations. They key is to manage your own expectations and the other side's expectations - where the UK have completely failed. I think if we had walked early over the schedule, the bill etc, we would be back at the table with sensible expectations set on both sides. As we are, Barnier is too far along to get back to any middle ground.

    Your idea would help reset expectations, and that is the only way a deal can develop. Also, makes no sense to be prepared. Frankly, it is a no brainer, but the 'theatrics' you propose are as important as the substance.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 991
    edited June 9

    rcs1000 said:

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Goodbye UK.
    The thing is, Leavers are democrats. If the majority in NI (or Scotland) want to leave, we would regret it, but we would never try to force them to stay, nor would we suggest that we enact revenge on the way out.

    But until and unless there is a clear, SUSTAINABLE majority for a change, NI is part of the UK and we will go to the wall to defend them and their interests, and if that leads to no deal so be it.

    But the British are unique. No wonder the EU can't understand it.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,887
    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,070
    Meanwhile debate is happening on the Brexit agreement:

  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,605

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,009
    Leaving the/a Customs Union is only vitally important to the headbangers. The referendum was not fought on it, the public don’t understand it and when it is explained to them they don’t care that much.

    The Leave campaign was fought and won on opposition to immigration. That victory needs to be honoured. The rest is up for grabs.

    If the Brexit extremists were more bothered about trade, they should have fought the referendum on it. As things stand, they should reflect on the implications of fighting a campaign based on xenophobic lies. Looking as if they will lose on this point is one of them.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,887
    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028
    Foxy said:

    Meanwhile debate is happening on the Brexit agreement:

    Oh my. That's quite a video.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 33,605
    edited June 9

    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
    It's not contradictory to have a border that is open to goods/services but closed to unlimited migration.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,338

    Leaving the/a Customs Union is only vitally important to the headbangers. The referendum was not fought on it, the public don’t understand it and when it is explained to them they don’t care that much.

    86.6% of the votes in the June 2017 election were for parties who pledged to leave the Customs Union.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,009

    Leaving the/a Customs Union is only vitally important to the headbangers. The referendum was not fought on it, the public don’t understand it and when it is explained to them they don’t care that much.

    86.6% of the votes in the June 2017 election were for parties who pledged to leave the Customs Union.
    I refer you to my previous answer, which is just as valid in relation to your asinine post.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028

    rcs1000 said:

    I think the most important thing the government can do is to make actual concrete (literally) preparations for a No Deal Brexit.

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Flouncing without looking like you are actually ready for a No Deal Brexit doesn't buy you leverage.

    You know I don't always agree with you, but you are talking plenty of sense here. A negotiation is not a battle of strength, it is a battle of expectations. They key is to manage your own expectations and the other side's expectations - where the UK have completely failed. I think if we had walked early over the schedule, the bill etc, we would be back at the table with sensible expectations set on both sides. As we are, Barnier is too far along to get back to any middle ground.

    Your idea would help reset expectations, and that is the only way a deal can develop. Also, makes no sense to be prepared. Frankly, it is a no brainer, but the 'theatrics' you propose are as important as the substance.
    It's been inconceivable to me why we didn't do all these things at the start. My view is that the best negotiating tactic is to "talk softly, but carry a big stick". While we might disagree about what the optimal strategy is, I think we probably both agree that "being mouthy, while having exactly no fallback plan" is probably the worst of all possible worlds. It means any threat to walk out lacks credibility.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
    It's not contradictory to have a border that is open to goods/services but closed to unlimited migration.
    Although, of course, we're suggesting the opposite with the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, in that Irish citizens have the same rights as British ones under laws that long predate the EU.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,338
    Love the header photo. At least one of those in frame has the honesty to have written all over his face "Dear God, get me the fuck out of here....."
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,070
    rcs1000 said:

    Foxy said:

    Meanwhile debate is happening on the Brexit agreement:

    Oh my. That's quite a video.
    No more cheese? or was it trees?

    Why weren't we told this before!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Foxy said:

    Meanwhile debate is happening on the Brexit agreement:

    Oh my. That's quite a video.
    No more cheese? or was it trees?

    Why weren't we told this before!
    Who was it who said the best argument against democracy was a conversation with the average voter.

    What genuinely shocked me how none of the contestants appeared to have read even the Lisbon Treaty.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350
    rcs1000 said:

    It's been inconceivable to me why we didn't do all these things at the start.

    For the same reason we are not doing them now.

    Concreting over Kent is not going to win the hearts and minds of the voting public.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028
    Scott_P said:

    rcs1000 said:

    It's been inconceivable to me why we didn't do all these things at the start.

    For the same reason we are not doing them now.

    Concreting over Kent is not going to win the hearts and minds of the voting public.
    There's quite a lot of Kent, and most of it voted Leave.

    To be fair, they might have simply been voting to leave Kent.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,887
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
    It's not contradictory to have a border that is open to goods/services but closed to unlimited migration.
    This is true, but the British apparently don't want to be in a customs union, so they're not going for the "open to goods/services" part.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Good morning, everyone.

    Nice idea, Mr. Herdson, but I think May's likelier to capitulate to her adversaries and concentrate on trying to outwit her own side.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350
    The Brexiteers are on a mudbank and beached; and a band of worried moderate Tory backbenchers and former ministers, anxious about the threat to their constituents’ livelihoods, ponder the hardest question of all in politics: not “what should I do?” but “when? Is now the moment?”

    It is. It may prove the last, best moment. In a series of votes next week the knife must be wielded.

    Be in no doubt: the crocs are floundering. For the foreign secretary not only to believe that his government’s Brexit preparations are approaching (his word) “meltdown”, but to broadcast that opinion, suggests only one thing to those who know Boris Johnson. He’s heading noisily for the lifeboats.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/remainers-need-courage-to-go-for-the-kill-l3nw2rqxk
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,764
    The reason we didn’t make proper preparations for a hard Brexit was that it would have cost a ton of money.

    And we were told Brexit would actually *save* us money.

    The way Brexit was sold, made it impossible to deliver.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,764
    Meanwhile, the hostile environment rattles on.

  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,032
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    rcs1000 said:

    It's been inconceivable to me why we didn't do all these things at the start.

    For the same reason we are not doing them now.

    Concreting over Kent is not going to win the hearts and minds of the voting public.
    There's quite a lot of Kent, and most of it voted Leave.
    They didn't vote for leave with any adverse consequences though. I think if only one thing has been established in this five star, fur lined, ocean going fuck up it's that.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,070

    Good morning, everyone.

    Nice idea, Mr. Herdson, but I think May's likelier to capitulate to her adversaries and concentrate on trying to outwit her own side.

    May can only outwit those more useless than her, so a fairly small pool to fish in. Fortunately most of those quarter wits are in the cabinet.
  • YellowSubmarineYellowSubmarine Posts: 2,439
    What a load of old cobblers. All British politics in 2018 is about May's need to call a Brexit GE to break the log jam but being unable to as she already has called a Brexit GE and lost it. In order to swing the handbag she needs a clear Commons majority for her position. But if she had a clear Commns majority she wouldn't need to swing the hand bag. The paradox of Authority is having it means you ofyen don't need to use it and not having it increases your need to use it.

    The EU has access to the internet and can read. It knows it's negotiating with a deeply divided country, parliament and government led by a weak PM. There's still a notional majority for abstract change but there is also a majority against any actual change. And the Status Quo isn't a default option because A50 makes No Deal the default option.

    But No Deal isn't credible because their is no majority in the country, parliament or cabinet for No Deal, we've made absolutely no preparations for No Dea, we've said we want a deal and the markets and business have priced in a deal.

    The EU are taking us to the cleaners because this is possibly the worst handled set of negotiations in recent history. The UK doesn't know what it wants, has set in process getting something it doesn't want by default in 10 months time, is acting on the bass of a marginal 3.8% majority based on folk who want radically dffetent things and who superceeded the referendum result with a Hung Parliament where theres no majority for anything and which enboldens the Lords.

    It's a global scale clusterf**k they'll be writing books about for a century as an example of how not to take complex decisions and impliment them.

    The idea 'swinging the handbag ' would some how transmute the situation is ludicrous. You can't turn lead into Gold let alone a Crock of ****.

    Even as a cultural reference it fails. Thatcher swung her Handbag at EU summits by ( a ) Knowing what she wanted ( b ) by being at the table to swing it with others at the table knowing she'd remain at the table so theu'd have to deal with her.

    We've announced we're leaving the table and can't agree on what we want to replace the table. The Handbag is no use in these circumstances. You might as well substitute Magic Wand for Handbag. It would be more honest.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,252
    edited June 9

    Meanwhile, the hostile environment rattles on.

    Denied her residency or told her as an EU citizen she doesn't require it (yet)? It can't be the former on the facts presented as the Home Office don't have the power to do so.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,489
    rcs1000 said:

    I think the most important thing the government can do is to make actual concrete (literally) preparations for a No Deal Brexit.

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Flouncing without looking like you are actually ready for a No Deal Brexit doesn't buy you leverage.

    And put ads in the paper to take HMF back up to 150,000, a large proportion of which will need to be deployed to the Province.

    Not a reason not to do as you suggest of course (can’t have the baddies dictate policy) but necessary nevertheless.

    Ah the good old days.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,252
    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Nice idea, Mr. Herdson, but I think May's likelier to capitulate to her adversaries and concentrate on trying to outwit her own side.

    May can only outwit those more useless than her, so a fairly small pool to fish in. Fortunately most of those quarter wits are in the cabinet.
    Your thesis fails. She hasn't even managed to outwit Juncker.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Anyone else having problems with Youtube loading? Wasn't working yesterday either. Every other site (including Google ones) seems to be working fine.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 991

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
    It's not contradictory to have a border that is open to goods/services but closed to unlimited migration.
    This is true, but the British apparently don't want to be in a customs union, so they're not going for the "open to goods/services" part.
    This is without doubt the most stupid comment that has been made regarding Brexit.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,450

    rcs1000 said:

    So: announce plans to hire 10,000 new customs staff, compulsory purchase some land at Dover and along key roads in Northern Ireland, separate Customs & Excise from HMRC and give it a heavyweight head, and announce plans to - as much as possible - replicate the system used on the Swiss or Norwegian border.

    Goodbye UK.
    The thing is, Leavers are democrats. If the majority in NI (or Scotland) want to leave, we would regret it, but we would never try to force them to stay, nor would we suggest that we enact revenge on the way out.

    But until and unless there is a clear, SUSTAINABLE majority for a change, NI is part of the UK and we will go to the wall to defend them and their interests, and if that leads to no deal so be it.

    But the British are unique. No wonder the EU can't understand it.
    Huh? So would you describe a 52-48 result, now reversed in the polls, as a clear, SUSTAINABLE majority?
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,450
    edited June 9

    The reason we didn’t make proper preparations for a hard Brexit was that it would have cost a ton of money.

    And we were told Brexit would actually *save* us money.

    The way Brexit was sold, made it impossible to deliver.

    Indeed - the idea that we could just grab a bunch of land around Dover and pour concrete over in it in a few months is farcical. These things take years and would have undoubtedly ended up in the courts. And it would rightly be questioned as whether it was a good use of public money.

    The ONLY away we could have got in a position where a WTO Brexit would have looked like a serious option would have been to announce that we would wait 3-5 years before triggering A50 to get everything ready. Good luck getting the ERG MPs happy with that...
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,450
    ydoethur said:

    Meanwhile, the hostile environment rattles on.

    Denied her residency or told her as an EU citizen she doesn't require it (yet)? It can't be the former on the facts presented as the Home Office don't have the power to do so.
    Yeah, this story makes no sense. Seems like this person has wasted thousands trying to apply for an immigration status she didn’t need.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,009
    It would be easy to take the critical approach that @YellowSubmarine has taken, much of which I agree with. But that doesn’t answer the question what the Prime Minister should do next.

    She has no majority for a no deal Brexit based on the unacceptability of the EU’s response to Britain’s customs union position: that much is obvious from the public statements of MPs of all stripes. There is no time to prepare meaningfully for no deal Brexit anyway.

    Despite the lateness of the hour, it is still not too late for her to do what she should have done at the outset, which is to get the EU to focus on the long term relationship it wants with Britain by setting out a clear vision of what Britain wants its relationship in 2030 to look like. This is her biggest failure and the EU negotiators reasonably have expressed their bafflement on this.

    The time is right to go over the heads of the Commission and speak clearly, directly and publicly to other leaders and the citizens of other countries on this subject. Theresa May’s weakness actually assists here because the threat is not what will she do next but what her successor would do next.

    This isn’t the Donald Trump strategy but the gorilla in a cage strategy: if the gorilla goes out of control there’s no telling what it might do. Given how nuts many Europhobes are (see numerous posts on pb for examples), this is a credible threat.

    She might well fail. The EU’s leaders have shown no long term vision. If she does, the twin disasters are complete capitulation and awful isolation. But it’s worth a try and it stands a better chance of succeeding (ie more than zero) than the course David Herdson outlines.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 991
    rcs1000 said:


    You know I don't always agree with you, but you are talking plenty of sense here. A negotiation is not a battle of strength, it is a battle of expectations. They key is to manage your own expectations and the other side's expectations - where the UK have completely failed. I think if we had walked early over the schedule, the bill etc, we would be back at the table with sensible expectations set on both sides. As we are, Barnier is too far along to get back to any middle ground.

    Your idea would help reset expectations, and that is the only way a deal can develop. Also, makes no sense to be prepared. Frankly, it is a no brainer, but the 'theatrics' you propose are as important as the substance.

    It's been inconceivable to me why we didn't do all these things at the start. My view is that the best negotiating tactic is to "talk softly, but carry a big stick". While we might disagree about what the optimal strategy is, I think we probably both agree that "being mouthy, while having exactly no fallback plan" is probably the worst of all possible worlds. It means any threat to walk out lacks credibility.
    I think it is very easy to explain why we didn't do it. The Government was worried that if we were ready for no deal the public would have been very reluctant to pay any sort of Brexit Bill (let alone 40bn plus) for an agreement unless it was genuinely good. The Remainers in Government were worried that they would not be able to push the public into accepting the close alignment deal they wanted. Easier not to prepare and threaten the people with disaster if they don't agree - cos that always works....

    But also, there was a very strong feeling (and this was clear on this forum last year) that we had to not do anything to upset the EU in negotiations, and planning for no deal was one of these things. Think of all the things we stopped talking about - we dropped our right to negotiate trade deals before Brexit, we stopped linking security to a deal, we stopped talking about rejecting a bad deal, we stopped talking about major regulatory divergence, we stopped saying the Brexit bill had to be linked to the trade deal. The wisdom, from the remain side mostly, was don't upset the EU because we have no power and we have to do what they tell us, but if we are nice and stop upsetting them it will all be OK. That didn't work either.

    You are right, we could have prepared and not rubbed it in their faces. But ultimately the civil service and Hammond never wanted to have to take the chance that the public would reject their BRINO deal. Problem is, there may very well not be a deal that any UK PM could agree to. So we are screwed.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028
    Can I just say "Wow".

    I published my video on the oil price yesterday morning (LA time), mentioned it on here, and posted a tweet.

    Said tweet has now got 180 odd likes, and a large number of retweets. My piece on trade deficits also saw its views shoot up, as people who saw my oil piece watched the trade deficit piece too.

    If there's anyone on here who hasn't seen either of my last two pieces, they're here:





    And now, to bed.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,252
    edited June 9

    ydoethur said:

    Meanwhile, the hostile environment rattles on.

    Denied her residency or told her as an EU citizen she doesn't require it (yet)? It can't be the former on the facts presented as the Home Office don't have the power to do so.
    Yeah, this story makes no sense. Seems like this person has wasted thousands trying to apply for an immigration status she didn’t need.
    It is one of the more unpleasant side-effects of Brexit that people who have lived here for years and want to stay are in a panic that they won't be able to. It's especially unpleasant as it isn't actually necessary. I don't think there was ever the slightest danger of people like this being ordered to leave, and as we have seen where errors have been made the courts have reversed them.

    The only moment it looked doubtful was when that drug addled Fascist Juncker was demanding they continue under the jurisdiction of the CJEU which is (a) toothless (b) infamous for its inability to read simple texts and (c) more bent than a wire coat hanger with an elephant dangling off it, rather than the British judicial system. But fortunately that moment seems to have passed without too much damage.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,760
    A bit of the Trump approach might have served us better than our apparent supine attitude. Obviously the EU doesn't believe we'll walk away at the moment. That is fatal in any negotiation.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,489

    rcs1000 said:


    You know I don't always agree with you, but you are talking plenty of sense here. A negotiation is not a battle of strength, it is a battle of expectations. They key is to manage your own expectations and the other side's expectations - where the UK have completely failed.

    [little bit snipped]

    Your idea would help reset expectations, and that is the only way a deal can develop. Also, makes no sense to be prepared. Frankly, it is a no brainer, but the 'theatrics' you propose are as important as the substance.

    It's been inconceivable to me why we didn't do all these things at the start. My view is that the best negotiating tactic is to "talk softly, but carry a big stick". While we might disagree about what the optimal strategy is, I think we probably both agree that "being mouthy, while having exactly no fallback plan" is probably the worst of all possible worlds. It means any threat to walk out lacks credibility.
    I think it is very easy to explain why we didn't do it. The Government was worried that if we were ready for no deal the public would have been very reluctant to pay any sort of Brexit Bill (let alone 40bn plus) for an agreement unless it was genuinely good. The Remainers in Government were worried that they would not be able to push the public into accepting the close alignment deal they wanted. Easier not to prepare and threaten the people with disaster if they don't agree - cos that always works....

    But also, there was a very strong feeling (and this was clear on this forum last year) that we had to not do anything to upset the EU in negotiations, and planning for no deal was one of these things. Think of all the things we stopped talking about - we dropped our right to negotiate trade deals before Brexit, we stopped linking security to a deal, we stopped talking about rejecting a bad deal, we stopped talking about major regulatory divergence, we stopped saying the Brexit bill had to be linked to the trade deal. The wisdom, from the remain side mostly, was don't upset the EU because we have no power and we have to do what they tell us, but if we are nice and stop upsetting them it will all be OK. That didn't work either.

    You are right, we could have prepared and not rubbed it in their faces. But ultimately the civil service and Hammond never wanted to have to take the chance that the public would reject their BRINO deal. Problem is, there may very well not be a deal that any UK PM could agree to. So we are screwed.
    We may or may not be screwed but it has nothing to do with Remainers not wanting to upset the EU and everything to do with the Brexiters in charge (because it is them in charge) really believing in British exceptionalism and that the EU would need us more than we would need the EU.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Indeed, Mr. Pulpstar.

    Congrats, Mr. 1000. Always nice when things take off.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,009
    rcs1000 said:

    Can I just say "Wow".

    I published my video on the oil price yesterday morning (LA time), mentioned it on here, and posted a tweet.

    Said tweet has now got 180 odd likes, and a large number of retweets. My piece on trade deficits also saw its views shoot up, as people who saw my oil piece watched the trade deficit piece too.

    If there's anyone on here who hasn't seen either of my last two pieces, they're here:





    And now, to bed.

    I’ve only viewed the oil piece, which was very good indeed.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,070

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
    It's not contradictory to have a border that is open to goods/services but closed to unlimited migration.
    This is true, but the British apparently don't want to be in a customs union, so they're not going for the "open to goods/services" part.
    This is without doubt the most stupid comment that has been made regarding Brexit.
    Nah. Checkout the Love Island Brexit debate:

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,489
    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
    It's not contradictory to have a border that is open to goods/services but closed to unlimited migration.
    This is true, but the British apparently don't want to be in a customs union, so they're not going for the "open to goods/services" part.
    This is without doubt the most stupid comment that has been made regarding Brexit.
    Nah. Checkout the Love Island Brexit debate:

    I don’t know why everyone is being so smug and dismissive.

    Their conversation is within the bounds of most people’s understanding and response to the current situation.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,764
    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    There may be problems with the negotiators but ultimately the problem is that the British want mutually contradictory things. It's not like a normal negotiation where you have two sides that both want something coherent.

    It doesn't help to try to bludgeon the other side into submission with your handbag if when they say, "Please, no more, I'll give you whatever you want, just stop hitting me with that handbag," you don't actually know what you want.

    The UK wants to leave the EU, but continue to trade with the EU. Not sure what is contradictory about that. The EU, on the other hand, want no hard border in Ireland but want to preserve the "integrity" of the single market/customs union. You can't do both without compromising (or annexing Northern Ireland, of course).
    The contradictory part is that the British want closed borders with the EU, but open borders with the EU.

    As you suggest if Northern Ireland left the UK or Ireland joined it the UK would no longer want the open border part, and it would be a conventional negotiation where the UK wanted something coherent, and the EU wanted some other coherent thing, but they had to trade things off to get something coherent that they both wanted.
    It's not contradictory to have a border that is open to goods/services but closed to unlimited migration.
    This is true, but the British apparently don't want to be in a customs union, so they're not going for the "open to goods/services" part.
    This is without doubt the most stupid comment that has been made regarding Brexit.
    Nah. Checkout the Love Island Brexit debate:

    I don’t know why everyone is being so smug and dismissive.

    Their conversation is within the bounds of most people’s understanding and response to the current situation.
    On the basis of this snippet, they seem to be against it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 23,028
    As an aside, my piece on Italy draws heavily on the music of Paul Simon:

    It grieves me so to see you in such pain,
    There must be something I can do to make you smile again
    ...
    There must be fifty ways to leave the Euro your lover
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,687

    Leaving the/a Customs Union is only vitally important to the headbangers. The referendum was not fought on it, the public don’t understand it and when it is explained to them they don’t care that much.

    86.6% of the votes in the June 2017 election were for parties who pledged to leave the Customs Union.
    What a marvellous non sequitur, Mr Mark!
  • YellowSubmarineYellowSubmarine Posts: 2,439
    Meanwhile back at the Ranch that Northern Ireland poll is extraordinary. After repercentaging exc D/K the Union lead is 3.2% !

    Now I think it's wise to take referendum polling with buckets of salt before we know the referendum question, the exact deal on offer and this one uses loaded terms like Leave and Remain. You'd also expect the older demographic whch is much more pro Union to turnout more heavily.

    But the trend is your friend and even if this one poll is a signifigant outlier the polling evidence that Brexit is energising Unification advocates mounts. It's another rejoinder to the No Deal/WTO nutters. We we're told the integrity of the UK wasn't at stake and it was all Project Fear. No wonder the Northrrn Irish border is proving such a problem with Brexit. It's not about workable solutions. It's about emotion and identity. And now avoiding a Border Poll which while I still think would see the Union win would be an historic event and a Scot like result woukd set up a Neverendum. Unlike Scotland Border Poll frequency is legislated for. A maximum of once every 7 years. With Sinn Fein now calling for one " within 5 years " giving them wiggle room a badly botched Brexit coukd now realistically trigger a Border Poll. No wonder May is being so cautious. Hard Brexit requires Hard Unionism.
  • nielhnielh Posts: 1,177




    The EU are taking us to the cleaners because this is possibly the worst handled set of negotiations in recent history. The UK doesn't know what it wants, has set in process getting something it doesn't want by default in 10 months time, is acting on the bass of a marginal 3.8% majority based on folk who want radically dffetent things and who superceeded the referendum result with a Hung Parliament where theres no majority for anything and which enboldens the Lords.

    .

    Good to see you contributing again, YS.

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,955
    rcs1000 said:

    Foxy said:

    Meanwhile debate is happening on the Brexit agreement:

    Oh my. That's quite a video.
    I would say these girls know as much about the topic as a large chunk of the public - hence why referendums are a stupid idea.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350

    Whiny rant SNIPPED. Again.

    There are only so many ways you can post "Remoaners killed my Unicorn", but keep trying
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,687
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Nice idea, Mr. Herdson, but I think May's likelier to capitulate to her adversaries and concentrate on trying to outwit her own side.

    May can only outwit those more useless than her, so a fairly small pool to fish in. Fortunately most of those quarter wits are in the cabinet.
    Your thesis fails. She hasn't even managed to outwit Juncker.
    Perhaps May is even more useless than Juncker - in which case Mr Foxy`s thesis holds good.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,887
    Anazina said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Foxy said:

    Meanwhile debate is happening on the Brexit agreement:

    Oh my. That's quite a video.
    I would say these girls know as much about the topic as a large chunk of the public - hence why referendums are a stupid idea.
    Also shows you how weak the Remain campaign was, they hardly hit the cheese angle at all
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,904
    This must be one of the most divisive and difficult times in recent British history. At least in war we’re generally all on the same side.

    The Boer Wars around the end of the 19th/beginning of the 20th and the Iraq War in this are exceptions, of course, but neither turned out well.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 1,955

    Anazina said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Foxy said:

    Meanwhile debate is happening on the Brexit agreement:

    Oh my. That's quite a video.
    I would say these girls know as much about the topic as a large chunk of the public - hence why referendums are a stupid idea.
    Also shows you how weak the Remain campaign was, they hardly hit the cheese angle at all
    The scouse girl was worried about a mass chopping down of trees.

    https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/sheffield-council-officer-asked-about-tree-felling-targets-under-oath-1-9195687

    It’s already begun.

    Now if that was on the bloody bus!!
  • YellowSubmarineYellowSubmarine Posts: 2,439
    edited June 9
    Meanwhile yesterday's Scottish polling again screams soft Brexit. In line with recent polling it shows a small Unionist majority at Holyrood post 2021. With Independence support unchanged and a sold but uninspiring 10% NO lead Sturgeon won't want to cut and run before 2021 even as she sees her window closing. But what if we follow some peoples advice on her and go chaotic No Deal in 10 months time ? The chaos would Nats. Perhaps May can see a soft initial Brexit and kicking the difficult decisions post 2021 makes Unionist sense ?

    While it's fair to say Sturgeon has overplayed her initial hand and Brexit hasn't impacted Independence support in the way many predicted yesterdays figures don't suggest a Union that can withstand too rigourous a stress test. Scotland isn't a vindication of Project Fear yet but it's far from a rebutal of it.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    F1: early Canada pre-qualifying ramble:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/06/canada-pre-qualifying-2018.html

    No tip, but there's been a fair amount of news recently, so worth reading for that.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,137

    It would be easy to take the critical approach that @YellowSubmarine has taken, much of which I agree with. But that doesn’t answer the question what the Prime Minister should do next.

    She has no majority for a no deal Brexit based on the unacceptability of the EU’s response to Britain’s customs union position: that much is obvious from the public statements of MPs of all stripes. There is no time to prepare meaningfully for no deal Brexit anyway.

    Despite the lateness of the hour, it is still not too late for her to do what she should have done at the outset, which is to get the EU to focus on the long term relationship it wants with Britain by setting out a clear vision of what Britain wants its relationship in 2030 to look like. This is her biggest failure and the EU negotiators reasonably have expressed their bafflement on this.

    The time is right to go over the heads of the Commission and speak clearly, directly and publicly to other leaders and the citizens of other countries on this subject. Theresa May’s weakness actually assists here because the threat is not what will she do next but what her successor would do next.

    This isn’t the Donald Trump strategy but the gorilla in a cage strategy: if the gorilla goes out of control there’s no telling what it might do. Given how nuts many Europhobes are (see numerous posts on pb for examples), this is a credible threat.

    She might well fail. The EU’s leaders have shown no long term vision. If she does, the twin disasters are complete capitulation and awful isolation. But it’s worth a try and it stands a better chance of succeeding (ie more than zero) than the course David Herdson outlines.

    I mostly agree with this. The EU represents the consensus of the member states so "going over the heads"doesn't get you anywhere, but considering what's in it for them does . Something that no-one on the UK has given a moment's thought to

    No deal is the absence of a deal. It might happen but it's unsustainable. The EU would just say, let us know when you are ready to talk.

    Isolation and capitulation are the measures Brexit deals in. Moderate isolation combined with a lot of capitulation is probably the best compromise we can get out of Brexit. The situation we are in is due to the contradictions of Brexit, not because leaders have been particularly incompetent.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 1,388
    Scott_P said:
    Didn’t “like the olympics” mean “spend lots of money with the private sector, fail to achieve a workable solution, then call in the army at the last minute?”

    Actually that’s probably what Green *does* mean.
  • YellowSubmarineYellowSubmarine Posts: 2,439
    The current trajectory looks like this to me. The A50 agreement will now contain a mechanism to extend the transition period past Dec 2020 but it will be called the NI backstop not an extension mechanism. We'll leave the EU next March with a transition. After a few months the drama will reset about the December 2020 cliff edge as it will be publically acknowledged the End State won't be ready for years. After much faux drama we'll use the back stop to extend the transition till December 2022 as the Tories with no majority won't want the Cliff edge before the GE. A new Tory leader will then fight 2022 on " Real Brexit " and it will be a Brexit election because neither of the big decisions ( leaving the CU and SM ) will have been implinented by then.

    There are myrriad known unknowns let alone unknown unknowns that could interfere. And of course others who see this trajectory will try and stop it. It's an observation of where we are not a prediction of where we will go. Brexit is like a Rocket which hasn't achieved escape velocity. It still has fuel in it's tank and will hit a target somewhere. But the physics say it doesn't have the energy to reach it's intended orbit. I fear we're headed for an outcome with which very few people of any persuation will be happy.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,338
    Tories with a 7 point lead over Labour perhaps says as much about the shambles that Corbyn Labour is on the EU as the Govt.'s shambles.....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Mr. Mark, or it's a rogue poll.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,116
    Just the CBE for Mark Carne. He really did do a shit job.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 38,350
    @ottocrat: “And what would Jimmy Saville do if he were running Great Ormond Street?”
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Mr. 86, not fond of the stupid new notes either. And I dislike the new pound coins.

    This might by a slightly niche concern, but I've got a shotgun cartridge that was converted into a pound coin holder. Perfect size. Worked for threepenny bits, too. But the new pound coin is a tiny bit wider in diameter so it doesn't fit.

    #MorrisDancerProblems
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 2,032

    Tories with a 7 point lead over Labour perhaps says as much about the shambles that Corbyn Labour is on the EU as the Govt.'s shambles.....

    Every tory should go down on their arthritic knees and make an offering to Cthulhu, the tutelary deity of the Conservative and Unionist Party, for the continuing good health of J. Corbyn.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,188
    edited June 9

    F1: early Canada pre-qualifying ramble:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/06/canada-pre-qualifying-2018.html

    No tip, but there's been a fair amount of news recently, so worth reading for that.

    Mercedes weren’t sandbagging. Hamilton’s time was set on the slowest tyres; he is looking rather competitive so far.
    It’s just that they chose too few hypersofts for this weekend, a few months back, so they can’t run them in practice.

    (And it’s pretty certain they’ll be able to get through Q2 on the ultras, which will,set them up well for the race.)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,188

    The current trajectory looks like this to me. The A50 agreement will now contain a mechanism to extend the transition period past Dec 2020 but it will be called the NI backstop not an extension mechanism. We'll leave the EU next March with a transition. After a few months the drama will reset about the December 2020 cliff edge as it will be publically acknowledged the End State won't be ready for years. After much faux drama we'll use the back stop to extend the transition till December 2022 as the Tories with no majority won't want the Cliff edge before the GE. A new Tory leader will then fight 2022 on " Real Brexit " and it will be a Brexit election because neither of the big decisions ( leaving the CU and SM ) will have been implinented by then.

    There are myrriad known unknowns let alone unknown unknowns that could interfere. And of course others who see this trajectory will try and stop it. It's an observation of where we are not a prediction of where we will go. Brexit is like a Rocket which hasn't achieved escape velocity. It still has fuel in it's tank and will hit a target somewhere. But the physics say it doesn't have the energy to reach it's intended orbit. I fear we're headed for an outcome with which very few people of any persuation will be happy.

    Sounds about right. The only question is what sort of spavined government will replace the existing muddle when they crawl out of office.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Mr. B, ah, fair enough. But we'll still need to see if Mercedes can use hypersofts without chewing them up. Less penalty for an earlier pit stop in the race, of course, than Monaco.

    As an aside, I was amused to hear Hamilton and Alonso bitching. It turns out a tedious procession is bad for the sport when the drivers don't enjoy it. Yet there was endless defending of such in the past when they were driving more quickly (though it was just as boring for spectators).
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,116

    Mr. 86, not fond of the stupid new notes either. And I dislike the new pound coins.

    This might by a slightly niche concern, but I've got a shotgun cartridge that was converted into a pound coin holder. Perfect size. Worked for threepenny bits, too. But the new pound coin is a tiny bit wider in diameter so it doesn't fit.

    #MorrisDancerProblems

    I knew someone would make that mistake! Carne not Carney.

    Carne's time at Network Rail has not been a happy one.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,009

    Mr. 86, not fond of the stupid new notes either. And I dislike the new pound coins.

    This might by a slightly niche concern, but I've got a shotgun cartridge that was converted into a pound coin holder. Perfect size. Worked for threepenny bits, too. But the new pound coin is a tiny bit wider in diameter so it doesn't fit.

    #MorrisDancerProblems

    If you don’t like the new English notes, I suggest you don’t acquaint yourself with the next set of Northern Irish notes:

    https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/28-may-3-june-2018/designing-northern-irelands-new-vertical-bank-notes/
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Mr. 86, my important point about the obnoxious and unhelpful numismatic deviancy of Carney being particularly irksome for those of us with shotgun cartridge pound coin holders remains entirely valid.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 19,338
    Dura_Ace said:

    Tories with a 7 point lead over Labour perhaps says as much about the shambles that Corbyn Labour is on the EU as the Govt.'s shambles.....

    Every tory should go down on their arthritic knees and make an offering to Cthulhu, the tutelary deity of the Conservative and Unionist Party, for the continuing good health of J. Corbyn.
    Even the Labour Party is going to work out that Corbyn is sending them down to yet another defeat. I said at the start of this year that it would get interesting if the Tories were on 43%, Labour 35%. Well......
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,116

    Mr. 86, not fond of the stupid new notes either. And I dislike the new pound coins.

    This might by a slightly niche concern, but I've got a shotgun cartridge that was converted into a pound coin holder. Perfect size. Worked for threepenny bits, too. But the new pound coin is a tiny bit wider in diameter so it doesn't fit.

    #MorrisDancerProblems

    If you don’t like the new English notes, I suggest you don’t acquaint yourself with the next set of Northern Irish notes:

    https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/28-may-3-june-2018/designing-northern-irelands-new-vertical-bank-notes/
    I think they look quite good.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Mr. Meeks, the URL alone is enough to agitate me.

    What's wrong with these people? I don't mind variety. Square Indian coins, perforated Chinese ones, or fantastically squiggly Hong Kong dollars are fine. But that doesn't mean every change is good.

    Humbug!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,188

    Mr. B, ah, fair enough. But we'll still need to see if Mercedes can use hypersofts without chewing them up. Less penalty for an earlier pit stop in the race, of course, than Monaco.

    As an aside, I was amused to hear Hamilton and Alonso bitching. It turns out a tedious procession is bad for the sport when the drivers don't enjoy it. Yet there was endless defending of such in the past when they were driving more quickly (though it was just as boring for spectators).

    They’ll start on the ultras, having got through Q2 on them - and could conceivably single stop with a switch to the softs.

    As for your second point, I remember Mansell/Senna having been quite entertaining albeit ultimately frustrating... and when they are racing at speed there is at least the chance of a meeting with the barriers.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,009
    tlg86 said:

    Mr. 86, not fond of the stupid new notes either. And I dislike the new pound coins.

    This might by a slightly niche concern, but I've got a shotgun cartridge that was converted into a pound coin holder. Perfect size. Worked for threepenny bits, too. But the new pound coin is a tiny bit wider in diameter so it doesn't fit.

    #MorrisDancerProblems

    If you don’t like the new English notes, I suggest you don’t acquaint yourself with the next set of Northern Irish notes:

    https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/28-may-3-june-2018/designing-northern-irelands-new-vertical-bank-notes/
    I think they look quite good.
    It’s hard enough getting northern Irish notes accepted in England without some design genius playing around with the format.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,188
    Scott_P said:

    @ottocrat: “And what would Jimmy Saville do if he were running Great Ormond Street?”

    The question is a stupid one in any event. Trump is a bully; operating from a position of weakness is simply beyond his capacity.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,188
    Though, interestingly, he has thrown out a provocative suggestion on G7 tarrifs:
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/08/trumps-g7-tariffs-trade-611888
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,445
    May was given an almost impossible situation, the only easy or obvious way out of it would have been a big election win with her authority stamped onto her MPs. With that political will behind her something like rcs prepare for no deal would have been more realistic politically.

    Without a mandate the competing options within the Conservative party make it impossible, you can get votes through the house on the much softer options but the Conservative party won't accept them and on the harder options the house won't accept them. Conservative voters mostly expect hard brexit but a small but vital to winning power number won't accept harsh short term (and maybe longer) consequences to achieve this.

    Not that she hasn't been terrible in plenty of ways.

    Also on the Trump running Brexit thing, I don't think the comparison works.

    I don't want to underestimate Trump, he is clever in some ways, the way he achieved the presidency by playing to the crowd and knowing what they wanted is a skill. However when it comes to international diplomacy Trump enters the room full of unarmed people as a raging 500 pound gorilla beating his chest. That commands some respect.

    We are not America, we go in to negotiate with 27 (ish?) nations most of which were are bigger than but one or two we aren't but collectively we are much smaller than. No longer is Trump the 500 pound gorilla beating his chest commanding respect but a single guy going into bar and picking a fight with a group. This will not achieve results, the USA can bully N. Korea, it can even pick a fight with China, it may work in the short term (I do wonder how well bullying works in the longer run) we aren't bully size, I think the biggest threats we can offer are to the EU are MAD.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Mr. Meeks, to be fair, it's probably not the worst design 'genius' decision lately.

    This is Carcassonne, in the south of France:

    And this is what some damned fool modern artist did to it:
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,450

    Mr. Meeks, to be fair, it's probably not the worst design 'genius' decision lately.

    This is Carcassonne, in the south of France:



    And this is what some damned fool modern artist did to it:

    Um, the castle was built in 1935. Not exactly mediaeval.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 1,445
    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:

    @ottocrat: “And what would Jimmy Saville do if he were running Great Ormond Street?”

    The question is a stupid one in any event. Trump is a bully; operating from a position of weakness is simply beyond his capacity.
    My very long post making this point came 2 minutes later, very rude of you to post it first.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,116
    Nigelb said:

    Mr. B, ah, fair enough. But we'll still need to see if Mercedes can use hypersofts without chewing them up. Less penalty for an earlier pit stop in the race, of course, than Monaco.

    As an aside, I was amused to hear Hamilton and Alonso bitching. It turns out a tedious procession is bad for the sport when the drivers don't enjoy it. Yet there was endless defending of such in the past when they were driving more quickly (though it was just as boring for spectators).

    They’ll start on the ultras, having got through Q2 on them - and could conceivably single stop with a switch to the softs.

    As for your second point, I remember Mansell/Senna having been quite entertaining albeit ultimately frustrating... and when they are racing at speed there is at least the chance of a meeting with the barriers.

    I'd add the 2006 race when Raikkonen was harrying Alonso for 40 laps or so. The pace was relentless and a real test of their driving ability. Unfortunately a safety car resulted in the tightly packed McLaren going up in flames as the engine overheated.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 19,748

    F1: early Canada pre-qualifying ramble:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/06/canada-pre-qualifying-2018.html

    No tip, but there's been a fair amount of news recently, so worth reading for that.

    Good piece. Mercedes were definitely sandbagging yesterday, they didn’t go near the qualifying tyres that the RBs used to set their times, and they’ll be keeping their older engines turned down until Q2. My tip is Bottas for a podium in qualifying, but Betfair isn’t really up and running yet. Last year Lewis was half a second faster than everyone else when it mattered on Saturday, it’s difficult to see him qualifying anywhere else today.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 44,918
    Mr. Sandpit, perhaps. It's been a very happy hunting ground for Hamilton in the past, but the Ferrari, I think, ought to be faster. Anyway, we'll find out. Obviously the pre-race ramble might well go up tomorrow.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,188

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_P said:

    @ottocrat: “And what would Jimmy Saville do if he were running Great Ormond Street?”

    The question is a stupid one in any event. Trump is a bully; operating from a position of weakness is simply beyond his capacity.
    My very long post making this point came 2 minutes later, very rude of you to post it first.
    Sadly we live in a soundbite age.
This discussion has been closed.