Friday 9th December 2016

Post by **adam** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:17 pm

It's also quite possible that a number of likely wider economic consequences that were discussed before the referendum but have yet to come to pass will suddenly come to pass, particularly in terms of our credit-worthiness and the willingness of a number of industries to stay here.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:27 pm

Theo Bertram ‏@theobertram 1h1 hour ago
***NEW LABOUR ANECDOTE KLAXON*** Liam Fox's Cold War. (This is a proper good one, including: was Cilla Black a Tory spy?)

https://twitter.com/theobertram/timelin ... 8655884288" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Long, but worth the read

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:34 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Again, I'm not convinced public reaction to invoking A50 will be that euphoric.

One possible benefit to Labour is that it will close off the chimera of the referendum result somehow being ignored/reversed to all but the totally delusional, and help the public to focus on what will actually happen. And on that, the vast majority of Labour is actually united - no to any "hard" Brexit.

Exactly Anatoly. Article 50 is being allowed to take on some mythical status, bit like a COBRA. When all it is is the UK telling the EU we want to leave, which is hardly a secret is it?

Let's get it over with!

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:40 pm

Let's not get it over with. It's leverage. We're going to invoke it just before the French elections and once those are out of the way, German Elections loom. That's the two most powerful rEU members telling us to get lost for the first 8 months of our 24 months.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:41 pm

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/di ... ng-report/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Disabled people face institutional disablism from employers, says damning report

http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/ ... eople-work" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:42 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Not sure if there is going to be a post Article 50 "honeymoon", but point taken.

Though we shouldn't forget that Labour did significantly better in last May's elections (Scotland excepted) "than expected".
They did, but in much better territory. Council Councils are their weakest. They did OK in 2013, but they should in opposition be winning a few of them. I think it'll be tough. May will have just invoked Article 50, there'll be a "cake and eat it" plan, and it'll seem fairly heady.

It'll be tough whoever is in charge, but a 3rd place should finish Jez.
Yeah and one of those brilliant alternative candidates will step up and take over. I mean it's been so long since they had a chance to stand.

[Actually Starmer & Thornberry are getting so much chance to shine that they may be in a different place]

Are you really saying coming 3rd is tenable for Corbyn? This is how Miliband did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... 13#Results" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:46 pm

adam wrote:It's also quite possible that a number of likely wider economic consequences that were discussed before the referendum but have yet to come to pass will suddenly come to pass, particularly in terms of our credit-worthiness and the willingness of a number of industries to stay here.

I don't know if that'll really kick in by the local elections.

There were reports that May's promised all kinds of tax concessions to Nissan. Logic dictates that she'll be offering these to a lot more companies. The short term effect of those is "vindication for Brexit Britain as a place to do business". The downside, that we're paying them to do investment they would have done anyway, won't really shine through.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:51 pm

I doubt very much if a 3rd place finish next May would be survivable for Corbyn, but it is also a long shot even if things stay much as they are.

(let's not forget that these at CC level in 2013 were UKIP's breakthrough elections - they did very creditably - and they could well suffer losses)

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:54 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:EU negotiators will offer Brits an individual opt-in to remain EU citizens, chief negotiator confirms
Exclusive: Guy Verhofstadt has fast-tracked the plan and will include it in his mandate

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65271.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm assuming this offer comes with demands for EU citizens to get the same. There's no reason for this to be conceded unilaterally.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 3:56 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:I doubt very much if a 3rd place finish next May would be survivable for Corbyn, but it is also a long shot even if things stay much as they are.

(let's not forget that these at CC level in 2013 were UKIP's breakthrough elections - they did very creditably - and they could well suffer losses)

UKIP hurt the Tories last time and if they fade (they didn't all that much in Sleaford) that might not help Labour very much.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:02 pm

Going on local knowledge, this is Gloucestershire in 2013. Tories did dreadfully.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glouceste ... tion,_2013" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kippers got all 3 of their seats from the Tories, and probably helped Labour gain a couple of seats from the Tories.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:08 pm

The Canary have spotted the real story about Sleaford.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:19 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote: They did, but in much better territory. Council Councils are their weakest. They did OK in 2013, but they should in opposition be winning a few of them. I think it'll be tough. May will have just invoked Article 50, there'll be a "cake and eat it" plan, and it'll seem fairly heady.

It'll be tough whoever is in charge, but a 3rd place should finish Jez.
Yeah and one of those brilliant alternative candidates will step up and take over. I mean it's been so long since they had a chance to stand.

[Actually Starmer & Thornberry are getting so much chance to shine that they may be in a different place]
Are you really saying coming 3rd is tenable for Corbyn? This is how Miliband did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... 13#Results" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If lovely folk like you don't stop whining on about Corbyn and he comes third it will be your fault. That much is clear to me. And for the record I didn't vote for him at all first time and did so with a heavy heart second time.

Tubby you are setting him up to fail and you should take a long hard look at yourself IMO. There was a chance to unseat him and nobody came close. He's the leader for now. Get over it.

How ever much you dislike Corbyn, if you want better things for your country you should IMO get behind him and attack the Tories instead. I don't rate Corbyn but he has some really very good politicians in his shadow cabinet. The best thing IMO is to get behind them. Corbyn will leave one day, but at a time of his choosing not yours.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:25 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/housing-net ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The housing poverty trap means work doesn't pay
Dawn Foster

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:25 pm

Bloomberg reporting (sorry no link) 21st Century Fox agree to buy Sky.

So once again Uncle Rupe gets his own way.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:26 pm

Further on above

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... to-buy-sky" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rupert Murdoch's Fox agrees deal to buy Sky
Share price jumps 30% after board agrees to offer from Murdoch’s US media company, five years after takeover was abandoned amid phone-hacking scandal

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:34 pm

Happy Century to Kirk Douglas.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:35 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote: Yeah and one of those brilliant alternative candidates will step up and take over. I mean it's been so long since they had a chance to stand.

[Actually Starmer & Thornberry are getting so much chance to shine that they may be in a different place]
Are you really saying coming 3rd is tenable for Corbyn? This is how Miliband did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... 13#Results" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If lovely folk like you don't stop whining on about Corbyn and he comes third it will be your fault. That much is clear to me. And for the record I didn't vote for him at all first time and did so with a heavy heart second time.

Tubby you are setting him up to fail and you should take a long hard look at yourself IMO. There was a chance to unseat him and nobody came close. He's the leader for now. Get over it.

How ever much you dislike Corbyn, if you want better things for your country you should IMO get behind him and attack the Tories instead. I don't rate Corbyn but he has some really very good politicians in his shadow cabinet. The best thing IMO is to get behind them. Corbyn will leave one day, but at a time of his choosing not yours.

I'm a bloke on a message board. I'm not a Labour MP or a Fleet Street columnist. I can't set Corbyn up to fail, I don't have any power.

I've actually set him a fairly low bar- I said staying 2nd will be a decent result next year. I said too that anybody will find it hard on hostile territory and at (as I see it) a good time for May. I wonder whether she might have decided on March because it's electorally good timing?

And he's there as long as he wants, no doubt about that. I don't want him challenged again- though he was the one who wanted annual challenges, let's remember that.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:37 pm

Whatever happens in the county council elections, I really don't want to see the sort of stuff that happened before the 2016 Local Elections, with the fit-up over Anti-Semitism. I want to see as united as possible a campaign.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:41 pm

HindleA wrote:Further on above

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... to-buy-sky" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rupert Murdoch's Fox agrees deal to buy Sky
Share price jumps 30% after board agrees to offer from Murdoch’s US media company, five years after takeover was abandoned amid phone-hacking scandal

Interesting.

I wouldn't think this is politically all that popular. Waving this through will bring Leveson back on to the agenda. Murdoch already owes the Tories for blocking that.

Being "Murdoch poodles" is poisonous for the Tories. This might be a chance to draw a line under it. Now you wouldn't want Tom Watson in government, would you?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 4:59 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Are you really saying coming 3rd is tenable for Corbyn? This is how Miliband did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... 13#Results" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If lovely folk like you don't stop whining on about Corbyn and he comes third it will be your fault. That much is clear to me. And for the record I didn't vote for him at all first time and did so with a heavy heart second time.

Tubby you are setting him up to fail and you should take a long hard look at yourself IMO. There was a chance to unseat him and nobody came close. He's the leader for now. Get over it.

How ever much you dislike Corbyn, if you want better things for your country you should IMO get behind him and attack the Tories instead. I don't rate Corbyn but he has some really very good politicians in his shadow cabinet. The best thing IMO is to get behind them. Corbyn will leave one day, but at a time of his choosing not yours.
I'm a bloke on a message board. I'm not a Labour MP or a Fleet Street columnist. I can't set Corbyn up to fail, I don't have any power.

I've actually set him a fairly low bar- I said staying 2nd will be a decent result next year. I said too that anybody will find it hard on hostile territory and at (as I see it) a good time for May. I wonder whether she might have decided on March because it's electorally good timing?

And he's there as long as he wants, no doubt about that. I don't want him challenged again- though he was the one who wanted annual challenges, let's remember that.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply Tubby. It's good to have you back here. I think it was the comment "3rd place should finish Jez" that wound me up a bit. I would prefer him to be replaced but I don't want him to be "finished". What would that serve? Maybe it was just a turn of phrase.

It's good that Corbyn can be challenged every year, but FFS let's see some decent challengers. And in the mean time wishing for his departure serves nobody except the Tories IMO. As I've said, he's far from my choice of leader, but he has surrounded himself with some very good people in key positions, Starmer, Thornberry, Rayner, Abrahams for example. I think the Tories are hugely vulnerable on Brexit, the economy, the NHS, grammar schools and other issues and I want these new stars to have their chance to make a mark.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:12 pm

I agree he's a good talent spotter in Parliament.

I'm sceptical about grammar schools getting that much of a boost. Not because May isn't a populist fool on the issue but because the main story in education is Academies. Do the people who run those want them made into secondary moderns? I don't think they do.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:15 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Again, I'm not convinced public reaction to invoking A50 will be that euphoric.

One possible benefit to Labour is that it will close off the chimera of the referendum result somehow being ignored/reversed to all but the totally delusional, and help the public to focus on what will actually happen. And on that, the vast majority of Labour is actually united - no to any "hard" Brexit.
Exactly Anatoly. Article 50 is being allowed to take on some mythical status, bit like a COBRA. When all it is is the UK telling the EU we want to leave, which is hardly a secret is it?

Let's get it over with!

I don't agree with this. There's one 'Brexit' and no other unless all 27 member states decide an altered arrangement for the UK is okay after Article 50 is sent to Brussels and two years are up.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:16 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:EU negotiators will offer Brits an individual opt-in to remain EU citizens, chief negotiator confirms
Exclusive: Guy Verhofstadt has fast-tracked the plan and will include it in his mandate

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65271.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm assuming this offer comes with demands for EU citizens to get the same. There's no reason for this to be conceded unilaterally.

Individual people can't reciprocate to another EU nation. This looks like some kind of gift.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:22 pm

Verhofstadt is working to the Council of Ministers. I'd be surprised if they were all behind it.

I wouldn't rule out "good cop bad cop" being played here.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:25 pm

citizenJA wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Again, I'm not convinced public reaction to invoking A50 will be that euphoric.

One possible benefit to Labour is that it will close off the chimera of the referendum result somehow being ignored/reversed to all but the totally delusional, and help the public to focus on what will actually happen. And on that, the vast majority of Labour is actually united - no to any "hard" Brexit.
Exactly Anatoly. Article 50 is being allowed to take on some mythical status, bit like a COBRA. When all it is is the UK telling the EU we want to leave, which is hardly a secret is it?

Let's get it over with!
I don't agree with this. There's one 'Brexit' and no other unless all 27 member states decide an altered arrangement for the UK is okay after Article 50 is sent to Brussels and two years are up.

That two years is what it says in the Treaty yes, but in the real world there will be slippage and fluidity all over the place. Look at the ratification of the Lisbon treaty in the first place! Ireland had two goes to get the "right" answer.

It suits May and the media to big up these dates and timelines. It makes everything so very dramatic. In the real world, the UK has decided to leave the EU. That will be hard to achieve, may take a decade and may never happen.

The thing is Remain is probably, rationally the sensible option. If we stay calm and hang on in there, it may well still play out that way.

I'm pretty sure the world won't change the day after Article 50 is triggered. Not at all. What will actually be different?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:26 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:EU negotiators will offer Brits an individual opt-in to remain EU citizens, chief negotiator confirms
Exclusive: Guy Verhofstadt has fast-tracked the plan and will include it in his mandate

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65271.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I haven't thought this through but I'll plough on regardless . .

Would this involve dual citizenship? Retention of the EU passport over any UK version (unlikely because I suppose that wouldn't work re travel from, and back to, the UK)? Being accused of being some sort of a traitor? Whatever it involves, though, count me in.

Edited - the bracket curse has made a come back

Edit - again to add an "a". Bumboils.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:30 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Yeah and one of those brilliant alternative candidates will step up and take over. I mean it's been so long since they had a chance to stand.

[Actually Starmer & Thornberry are getting so much chance to shine that they may be in a different place]
Are you really saying coming 3rd is tenable for Corbyn? This is how Miliband did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... 13#Results" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If lovely folk like you don't stop whining on about Corbyn and he comes third it will be your fault. That much is clear to me. And for the record I didn't vote for him at all first time and did so with a heavy heart second time.

Tubby you are setting him up to fail and you should take a long hard look at yourself IMO. There was a chance to unseat him and nobody came close. He's the leader for now. Get over it.

How ever much you dislike Corbyn, if you want better things for your country you should IMO get behind him and attack the Tories instead. I don't rate Corbyn but he has some really very good politicians in his shadow cabinet. The best thing IMO is to get behind them. Corbyn will leave one day, but at a time of his choosing not yours.

Labour is a political party with clearly defined goals and functions. I will vote Labour to see the end of Tory government.
Labour isn't a religion, not an ethics club, it's how regular people get any semblance of representation in government.
That's the reality. If Corbyn is leader, I'll vote Labour. If Corbyn's not leader, I'll vote Labour. I won't apologise to
anyone for supporting the Labour party even if Labour members or leadership do something I can't abide.
My duty then is not follow that example, try to alter course if there's a reasonable chance I can do so.
But I'll vote Labour. It's the only thing I've learned from Tories I admire. Tories vote Tory.
People must stay together or they'll get knocked down, one by one.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:35 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote: Exactly Anatoly. Article 50 is being allowed to take on some mythical status, bit like a COBRA. When all it is is the UK telling the EU we want to leave, which is hardly a secret is it?

Let's get it over with!
I don't agree with this. There's one 'Brexit' and no other unless all 27 member states decide an altered arrangement for the UK is okay after Article 50 is sent to Brussels and two years are up.
That two years is what it says in the Treaty yes, but in the real world there will be slippage and fluidity all over the place. Look at the ratification of the Lisbon treaty in the first place! Ireland had two goes to get the "right" answer.

It suits May and the media to big up these dates and timelines. It makes everything so very dramatic. In the real world, the UK has decided to leave the EU. That will be hard to achieve, may take a decade and may never happen.

The thing is Remain is probably, rationally the sensible option. If we stay calm and hang on in there, it may well still play out that way.

I'm pretty sure the world won't change the day after Article 50 is triggered. Not at all. What will actually be different?

Given notice to quit. Any change of mind is no longer the UK's alone to decide.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:36 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:If lovely folk like you don't stop whining on about Corbyn and he comes third it will be your fault. That much is clear to me. And for the record I didn't vote for him at all first time and did so with a heavy heart second time.

Tubby you are setting him up to fail and you should take a long hard look at yourself IMO. There was a chance to unseat him and nobody came close. He's the leader for now. Get over it.

How ever much you dislike Corbyn, if you want better things for your country you should IMO get behind him and attack the Tories instead. I don't rate Corbyn but he has some really very good politicians in his shadow cabinet. The best thing IMO is to get behind them. Corbyn will leave one day, but at a time of his choosing not yours.
I'm a bloke on a message board. I'm not a Labour MP or a Fleet Street columnist. I can't set Corbyn up to fail, I don't have any power.

I've actually set him a fairly low bar- I said staying 2nd will be a decent result next year. I said too that anybody will find it hard on hostile territory and at (as I see it) a good time for May. I wonder whether she might have decided on March because it's electorally good timing?

And he's there as long as he wants, no doubt about that. I don't want him challenged again- though he was the one who wanted annual challenges, let's remember that.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply Tubby. It's good to have you back here. I think it was the comment "3rd place should finish Jez" that wound me up a bit. I would prefer him to be replaced but I don't want him to be "finished". What would that serve? Maybe it was just a turn of phrase.

It's good that Corbyn can be challenged every year, but FFS let's see some decent challengers. And in the mean time wishing for his departure serves nobody except the Tories IMO. As I've said, he's far from my choice of leader, but he has surrounded himself with some very good people in key positions, Starmer, Thornberry, Rayner, Abrahams for example. I think the Tories are hugely vulnerable on Brexit, the economy, the NHS, grammar schools and other issues and I want these new stars to have their chance to make a mark.

I agree with you, Paul.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:39 pm

Apologies for the length on the threads. I want to be understood and I'm not all that great a writer.
Nuances of thought I can't get on the page. It's not like we're all around a table where we can see
each other and read all the words not spoken but transmitting meaning.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:40 pm

citizenJA wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
citizenJA wrote: I don't agree with this. There's one 'Brexit' and no other unless all 27 member states decide an altered arrangement for the UK is okay after Article 50 is sent to Brussels and two years are up.
That two years is what it says in the Treaty yes, but in the real world there will be slippage and fluidity all over the place. Look at the ratification of the Lisbon treaty in the first place! Ireland had two goes to get the "right" answer.

It suits May and the media to big up these dates and timelines. It makes everything so very dramatic. In the real world, the UK has decided to leave the EU. That will be hard to achieve, may take a decade and may never happen.

The thing is Remain is probably, rationally the sensible option. If we stay calm and hang on in there, it may well still play out that way.

I'm pretty sure the world won't change the day after Article 50 is triggered. Not at all. What will actually be different?
Given notice to quit. Any change of mind is no longer the UK's alone to decide.

Spot on. Once article 50 is invoked the rest of the EU can make us leave whether we want to or not, the ball is completely in their court.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:40 pm

PorFavor wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:EU negotiators will offer Brits an individual opt-in to remain EU citizens, chief negotiator confirms
Exclusive: Guy Verhofstadt has fast-tracked the plan and will include it in his mandate

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65271.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I haven't thought this through but I'll plough on regardless . .

Would this involve dual citizenship? Retention of the EU passport over any UK version (unlikely because I suppose that wouldn't work re travel from, and back to, the UK)? Being accused of being some sort of a traitor? Whatever it involves, though, count me in.

Edited - the bracket curse has made come back

I'm all for it! Citizens of the world, unite!

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:44 pm

Did we have this?

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/R ... n-benefits" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Transport secretary Chris Grayling has admitted that the DfT did not carry out a thorough evaluation of the time and cost benefits of privatising the new route between Oxford and Cambridge, despite the major decision marking the first time since the 1990s that Britain will have integrated rail operation.
Pressed at the Commons by Liberal Democrat MP Tom Brake, who represents Carshalton and Wallington, Grayling argued that the “assumption that Network Rail should always do everything does not ever give us any benchmarks to judge whether someone else can do it better”.
Instead, the secretary of state proposed: “I want to use this as an opportunity, in a way that does not affect the rest of the network, to test the way that we are doing things, and to see whether we can do them quicker and better.”

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:49 pm

Also interesting.

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/R ... y-interest" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In 2010, Borealis Infrastructure and Canadian pension fund Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan acquired the 30-year contract from the DfT to operate and manage HS1.
However, in a statement released yesterday, Ontario Teachers confirmed that the partnership was carrying out a strategic review of its ownership of HS1 following “a number of investment inquiries from third parties”.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:52 pm

On the privatization of East-West rail (track), it's worth saying that Network Rail do work very closely with train companies already, and that makes some sense. Lots of people think Network Rail is inefficient, including the Scottish Government who want to be able to set up their own organization. But surely going ahead with privatization without doing careful study is not on. I'd certainly expect the Scottish Government to build case.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:55 pm

Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:That two years is what it says in the Treaty yes, but in the real world there will be slippage and fluidity all over the place. Look at the ratification of the Lisbon treaty in the first place! Ireland had two goes to get the "right" answer.

It suits May and the media to big up these dates and timelines. It makes everything so very dramatic. In the real world, the UK has decided to leave the EU. That will be hard to achieve, may take a decade and may never happen.

The thing is Remain is probably, rationally the sensible option. If we stay calm and hang on in there, it may well still play out that way.

I'm pretty sure the world won't change the day after Article 50 is triggered. Not at all. What will actually be different?
Given notice to quit. Any change of mind is no longer the UK's alone to decide.
Spot on. Once article 50 is invoked the rest of the EU can make us leave whether we want to or not, the ball is completely in their court.

I'm sorry I start to feel like I'm an oddball here, but do you think Angela Merkel wouldn't ignore or overturn Article 50 if it suited her?

Indeed just think of it from Merkel's perspective. Do you think on 1 April she's suddenly going to start wondering how to get rid of us? Or how to keep us? She's already planning of course. And if it takes more or less than 2 years, do you think she'll care? That the EU won't be able to flex deadlines and rules as they always do?

What Theresa May does on 31 March is of trifling importance. And if we let her big it up we are playing her game.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 5:58 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Verhofstadt is working to the Council of Ministers. I'd be surprised if they were all behind it.

I wouldn't rule out "good cop bad cop" being played here.

Clever, Verhofstadt. He's aware of the fact at least 16 million UK citizens don't want out of the EU.
UK government would have to okay this. Please, everyone, read the article and let me know your
thoughts. I noticed the prominence of last night's vote for the Tory government's amendment and
Article 50 send off. 'Contact your MEP and let them know you want opportunities beyond the UK'.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:13 pm

"Though the British Government has been coy on what it wants Britain’s post-Brexit future to look like, it is likely that British citizens
will lose the automatic right to live and work in the EU after Brexit. This is because Prime Minister Theresa May has made clear that
she would like to restrict freedom of movement from EU countries to the UK, a policy that would likely be reciprocated by the EU for
British citizens."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65271.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sounds feudal.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:18 pm

Ah, I see Verhofstadt represents the Parliament only, while Barnier represents the Commission (ie the Council of Ministers).

I'd guess Barnier is the more important of the two.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:23 pm

@PaulfromYorkshire

Or may I call you "Oddball"? (From one of my favourite films.)

I really dread to think of the trouble it would cause here if Angela Merkel did what you suggest she could do. Much better to work for a home-grown (red, white and blue!) retreat from the exit door.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:27 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote: I'm sorry I start to feel like I'm an oddball here, but do you think Angela Merkel wouldn't ignore or overturn Article 50 if it suited her?

Indeed just think of it from Merkel's perspective. Do you think on 1 April she's suddenly going to start wondering how to get rid of us? Or how to keep us? She's already planning of course. And if it takes more or less than 2 years, do you think she'll care? That the EU won't be able to flex deadlines and rules as they always do?

What Theresa May does on 31 March is of trifling importance. And if we let her big it up we are playing her game.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... /13804.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Conclusions

14.If a Member State decides to withdraw from the EU, the process described in Article 50 is the only way of doing so consistent with EU and international law.

15.There is nothing in Article 50 formally to prevent a Member State from reversing its decision to withdraw in the course of the withdrawal negotiations. The political consequences of such a change of mind would, though, be substantial.

May doesn't need Merkel's permission to revoke Article 50. I reckon that provided there were no elections coming up and Britain had enough egg on its face to put the German UKIP off, that Merkel would be very happy if we called it off. But that would cause May huge problems at home.

Why is it trivial if we invoke Article 50 in March? It's internal Tory pressure that's causing her to do it ASAP. She could have said something like "we're leaving but want the EU to succeed. It has lots ofwork to do on the Euro, and in friendly spirit we will give it space to do that first".

Even within 2017, I don't think it's the right time. I'd rather have it after the German Elections, for reasons described.

I want her called out on this. She'll win a vote in Parliament, but so what?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:33 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:I'm sorry I start to feel like I'm an oddball here, but do you think Angela Merkel wouldn't ignore or overturn Article 50 if it suited her?

Indeed just think of it from Merkel's perspective. Do you think on 1 April she's suddenly going to start wondering how to get rid of us? Or how to keep us? She's already planning of course. And if it takes more or less than 2 years, do you think she'll care? That the EU won't be able to flex deadlines and rules as they always do?

What Theresa May does on 31 March is of trifling importance. And if we let her big it up we are playing her game.

(cJA edit)

First, thank you, Paul. Thank you for continuing the discussion. This is an unprecedented situation. I'm not an international treaty
expert. I'm a regular person having to read, understand, document and work within the framework of complicated requirements
non-EU citizens must learn in order to be recognised by EU nations. I know some law. I don't know Merkel or the specific power
she's got a hold of. May I know where you've gotten this information about Merkel's capacities in this situation? I've not seen
or read legal testimony making me feel easier.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:43 pm

It is not clear that article 50 is reversible, no one seems to know:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-ar ... le-2016-10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I were an MP this is the sort of thing I would like to have clarified before committing myself to voting for article 50 in March. Making assumptions about things that are not clear seems a very risky game of chance with an entire country's future. The idea that anyone would consider triggering article 50 as "trivial" is surprising to me.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:45 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:Did we have this?

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/R ... n-benefits" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Transport secretary Chris Grayling has admitted that the DfT did not carry out a thorough evaluation of the time and cost benefits of privatising the new route between Oxford and Cambridge, despite the major decision marking the first time since the 1990s that Britain will have integrated rail operation.
Pressed at the Commons by Liberal Democrat MP Tom Brake, who represents Carshalton and Wallington, Grayling argued that the “assumption that Network Rail should always do everything does not ever give us any benchmarks to judge whether someone else can do it better”.
Instead, the secretary of state proposed: “I want to use this as an opportunity, in a way that does not affect the rest of the network, to test the way that we are doing things, and to see whether we can do them quicker and better.”

'We're Tories! We'll do what we like.'
And they do.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:46 pm

Willow904 wrote:It is not clear that article 50 is reversible, no one seems to know:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-ar ... le-2016-10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I were an MP this is the sort of thing I would like to have clarified before committing myself to voting for article 50 in March. Making assumptions about things that are not clear seems a very risky game of chance with an entire country's future. The idea that anyone would consider triggering article 50 as "trivial" is surprising to me.

Honey, yes!
I agree with you using the exuberant lingo of my people.

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 6:59 pm

citizenJA wrote:
Willow904 wrote:It is not clear that article 50 is reversible, no one seems to know:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-ar ... le-2016-10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I were an MP this is the sort of thing I would like to have clarified before committing myself to voting for article 50 in March. Making assumptions about things that are not clear seems a very risky game of chance with an entire country's future. The idea that anyone would consider triggering article 50 as "trivial" is surprising to me.
Honey, yes!
I agree with you using the exuberant lingo of my people.

The authors seem to think it's reversible:

Triggering Article 50 does not mean it cannot be later revoked, according to a leading EU lawyer who helped write it, who also warned of “15 years of economic pain” immediately after the UK leaves the European Union.
“My opinion is that there is no legal provision in Article 50 providing that when you give your intention you cannot change your intention, so I think it’s possible legally,” lawyer Jean Claude Piris told Sky News.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 31446.html

The Scottish cross-bench peer who wrote Article 50 - the procedure by which the UK would leave the EU - believed it was "not irrevocable".
In a BBC interview, Lord Kerr of Kinlochard said the UK could choose to stay in the EU even after exit negotiations had begun.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s ... s-37852628

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 7:05 pm

Willow904 wrote:It is not clear that article 50 is reversible, no one seems to know:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-ar ... le-2016-10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I were an MP this is the sort of thing I would like to have clarified before committing myself to voting for article 50 in March. Making assumptions about things that are not clear seems a very risky game of chance with an entire country's future. The idea that anyone would consider triggering article 50 as "trivial" is surprising to me.

The man who helped write it says it can be stopped, I would think he knows a lot about it and the procedures involved

(this bit - sort of - amused me in an ironic way)
"He explained: "I thought the circumstances in which it would be used, if ever, would be when there was a coup in a member state and the EU suspended that country's membership.
"I thought that at that point the dictator in question might be so cross that he'd say 'right, I'm off' and it would be good to have a procedure under which he could leave."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s ... s-37852628" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eric_WLothian · Post by **Eric_WLothian** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 7:06 pm

PorFavor wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:EU negotiators will offer Brits an individual opt-in to remain EU citizens, chief negotiator confirms
Exclusive: Guy Verhofstadt has fast-tracked the plan and will include it in his mandate

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 65271.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I haven't thought this through but I'll plough on regardless . .

Would this involve dual citizenship? Retention of the EU passport over any UK version (unlikely because I suppose that wouldn't work re travel from, and back to, the UK)? Being accused of being some sort of a traitor? Whatever it involves, though, count me in.

Edited - the bracket curse has made a come back

Edit - again to add an "a". Bumboils.

Nothing to stop EU countries stamping a permanent visa in a UK passport, giving the same privileges as an EU passport.

Personally, I think the powers that be should go back to the referendum ballot papers and let all those who voted remain keep an EU passport. Stuff the rest of them.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Fri 09 Dec, 2016 7:09 pm

My last Corbyn-related point, honestly. From a bloke on another board.

Labour and the Lib Dems need each other to do well in the General Election. There are lots of seats with Cons 1st and LD 2nd.

How does "Vote Farron, Get Corbyn" sound in those seats? "Vote Miliband, Get Sturgeon" looked scarily effective to me.