Saturday 10th & Sunday 11th June 2017

Post by **refitman** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 6:09 am

Morning all.

Post by **refitman** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 6:13 am

I know someone who works in the civil service, in Northern Ireland, from another site. These are his thoughts on the DUP:

In case anyone is going to google the DUP to find out more about them, they are the most venal, corrupt, homophobic, sectarian, backward looking shower of synts out there but with a veneer of dog bothering. The BNP never really made any inroads over here because I think they were a bit too soft for most DUP voters. I’d say what I really think but I’m at work and civil servants are meant to be impartial, so for balance the Shinners are a shower of synts too.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:04 am

Thanks RFM

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:05 am

G Live from last night:

In her victory speech, Emma Dent Coad said she would focus on overcoming “unforgivable inequalities” in Kensington.

This constituency is a microcosm of everything that is wrong in this country after seven years of incompetent and uncaring coalition and Tory government.

I will do everything in my power in the next five years to make ‘One Kensington’ an example of the finest qualities of common humanity, mutual respect for all our communities and social justice to create a thoughtful, kind, co-operative and tolerant society where we can all prosper and thrive.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:13 am

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 83021.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Almost 300,000 people sign petition against the Tory-DUP deal in just 12 hours

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:20 am

The Rowson

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... nt-cartoon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:25 am

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ail-labour" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I certainly underestimated the breadth and the depth of that connection. So did many. The press and broadcasters have relied on old truths: that manifestos don’t matter, that tabloid coverage is crucial, that the young are somewhat flaky. Never have I been so happy to admit I was wrong. It was clear even before the results started coming in: the hope of so many on social media and the tirelessness of those out campaigning contrasted with the stunned, sometimes agonised coverage of the old men who govern the airwaves. Did anyone under 30 even appear? This will surely change. The media has to reflect, not simply attempt to create the world.

Quite.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:27 am

It matters significantly now that they are out of touch. It matters that their relentless negativity did not chime. In this one moment they are cut down to size: not fixers of government, not the high priests of the electorate but strange angry blokes selling seven varieties of hate while ranting to themselves.

“Best just to ignore them,” we can now say to each other – and actually mean it.

As I said yesterday it's the hope that hurts, but ... let's hope so.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:32 am

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... r-disaster" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Tory remainers are already demanding a rethink on Brexit. “Many of us will be saying, ‘Well, we tried the Ukippy thing and look what happened, and we’re not doing it any more’,” says one well-placed ex-minster. “I think the single market and freedom of movement decisions are all back in play.”

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:41 am

Rory Cellan-Jones @ruskin147

Political pundits are brilliant - they utterly failed to predict the election result but they already know why it happened & what comes next
7:31 AM · Jun 10, 2017

Quite.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:48 am

A good piece from John Harris

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ify-brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This really drives at one of the issues that we have discussed so often here. Friends here won't be surprised to know that I agree wholeheartedly

it turned out that Corbyn and his colleagues’ basic acceptance of Brexit left open the possibility of a Labour revival in its old, leave-voting heartlands. And eventually their argument that the Tories envisaged leaving Europe as another step towards some Thatcherite dystopia chimed with a big part of a big part of the public mood. For people, including me, who criticised their contortions on Europe, pointing this out entails eating a big helping of humble pie. That’s fine: it deserves no end of praise.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:50 am

Cathryn Parkes‏ @CathrynParkes 10h10 hours ago

Everything this photo says. #GE2017 #Labour #Kensington #hungparliament #electoralreform #bbcqt

Post by **refitman** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:50 am

Worth reading this twitter thread on the mess that is NI politics and just how bad May's DUP decision is: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 8:34 am

refitman wrote:Worth reading this twitter thread on the mess that is NI politics and just how bad May's DUP decision is: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seconded with a passion. Came here just now to suggest the same thread. It is outstanding, and a greater indictment than most of the media is likely to produce, even now.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 8:44 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:A good piece from John Harris

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ify-brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This really drives at one of the issues that we have discussed so often here. Friends here won't be surprised to know that I agree wholeheartedly

it turned out that Corbyn and his colleagues’ basic acceptance of Brexit left open the possibility of a Labour revival in its old, leave-voting heartlands. And eventually their argument that the Tories envisaged leaving Europe as another step towards some Thatcherite dystopia chimed with a big part of a big part of the public mood. For people, including me, who criticised their contortions on Europe, pointing this out entails eating a big helping of humble pie. That’s fine: it deserves no end of praise.

Yes. The problem with that kind of argument is that it thinks Brexit is just an electoral issue: what matters is the outcome in terms of votes.

Brexit is THE issue of our times. Billion turn on it. The damage to the UK of the Brexit that is coming is enormous: far, far greater than the difference in tax/spend between the Tory and Labour manifestos.

So, you really ought to adopt the right position on it, regardless of electoral advantage.

So, much as I'd love it if we could now stop Hard Brexit, it is really hard to see how we can given that we've already invoked article 50.

Brexit is for most people a low salience issue. That is one reason why the Tory campaign failed so badly (there are many others). You can't run a Brexit election: most people are completely clueless, they have no idea about the terrible damage about to hit us all. An issue they do care about (unfortunately) is immigration. That harmed Labour in 2015, but not now because it is thought "settled" because we're leaving the EU and no more Poles are coming. That is badly wrong, and will eventually go into reverse.

So yes, it is good that the left did well, and it is good that there seems room for a bolder approach on the economy from Labour. But the far more important election was 2016 (or if you like 2015 which led to it) and that was lost. That the parties who would try to reverse that (Greens, SNP, LIb Dems) did far worse than the two big parties who won't matters. The kind of politics I want lost really badly (as I said in advance it would).

All the glee over Theresa May, Nick Timothy, Fiona Hill and internal Tory wrangling looks juvenile. The art 50 clock is ticking, and disaster is inexorably coming our way. Our main opposition party is talking about issues that were really important before 2016, but on the big one hasn't got much to say other than "we'd do Brexit better". How?

People understand the NHS, schools, inflation, disability benefits, homelessness etc. They don't really understand how these are all going to deteriorate, badly, because of Brexit regardless of who is in power.

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 8:56 am

Whether EU can possibly cobble together a not too painful Divorce settlement offer is an another unknown ...

Got to get busy , so offline now.

Which knee operation was it ?

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 8:59 am

PS Chris Leslie on Toady still fiercely opposed to JC . Nasty bit of work, dishonest too. Hilary Benn " family comeong together" I heard ...
bifn xx

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:04 am

SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:A good piece from John Harris

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ify-brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This really drives at one of the issues that we have discussed so often here. Friends here won't be surprised to know that I agree wholeheartedly

it turned out that Corbyn and his colleagues’ basic acceptance of Brexit left open the possibility of a Labour revival in its old, leave-voting heartlands. And eventually their argument that the Tories envisaged leaving Europe as another step towards some Thatcherite dystopia chimed with a big part of a big part of the public mood. For people, including me, who criticised their contortions on Europe, pointing this out entails eating a big helping of humble pie. That’s fine: it deserves no end of praise.

Yes. The problem with that kind of argument is that it thinks Brexit is just an electoral issue: what matters is the outcome in terms of votes.

Brexit is THE issue of our times. Billion turn on it. The damage to the UK of the Brexit that is coming is enormous: far, far greater than the difference in tax/spend between the Tory and Labour manifestos.

So, you really ought to adopt the right position on it, regardless of electoral advantage.

So, much as I'd love it if we could now stop Hard Brexit, it is really hard to see how we can given that we've already invoked article 50.

Brexit is for most people a low salience issue. That is one reason why the Tory campaign failed so badly (there are many others). You can't run a Brexit election: most people are completely clueless, they have no idea about the terrible damage about to hit us all. An issue they do care about (unfortunately) is immigration. That harmed Labour in 2015, but not now because it is thought "settled" because we're leaving the EU and no more Poles are coming. That is badly wrong, and will eventually go into reverse.

So yes, it is good that the left did well, and it is good that there seems room for a bolder approach on the economy from Labour. But the far more important election was 2016 (or if you like 2015 which led to it) and that was lost. That the parties who would try to reverse that (Greens, SNP, LIb Dems) did far worse than the two big parties who won't matters. The kind of politics I want lost really badly (as I said in advance it would).

All the glee over Theresa May, Nick Timothy, Fiona Hill and internal Tory wrangling looks juvenile. The art 50 clock is ticking, and disaster is inexorably coming our way. Our main opposition party is talking about issues that were really important before 2016, but on the big one hasn't got much to say other than "we'd do Brexit better". How?

People understand the NHS, schools, inflation, disability benefits, homelessness etc. They don't really understand how these are all going to deteriorate, badly, because of Brexit regardless of who is in power.

Well the simple suggestion of talking nicely to the EU rather than declaring war would be a good start IMHO. And could lead somewhere quite good

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:14 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote: Well the simple suggestion of talking nicely to the EU rather than declaring war would be a good start IMHO. And could lead somewhere quite good

Yes. I think that is far fetched and naive. It is in the interests of the rest of the EU for Brexit to be a proven failure to prevent further break up. "Being nice" isn't actually a practical solution to the problems we're about to face. We aren't going anywhere good with Brexit, regardless of who is in power.

Meanwhile we talk about the NHS, schools, disability benefits etc etc, because we understand those, and think we have solutions, ignoring the bigger, intractable problem on which everything else turns.

Post by **refitman** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:15 am

PaulfromYorkshire wrote: Well the simple suggestion of talking nicely to the EU rather than declaring war would be a good start IMHO. And could lead somewhere quite good

McDonnell was very good on this, on the Ch4 Alternative show.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:28 am

refitman wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote: Well the simple suggestion of talking nicely to the EU rather than declaring war would be a good start IMHO. And could lead somewhere quite good
McDonnell was very good on this, on the Ch4 Alternative show.

I am afraid I don't think he was.

In practical economic terms what matters is single market membership (not as repeated over and over again access) and (to a lesser extent) the customs union.

When asked, the public say they want us to stay in the single market, and to end freedom of movement.

What Labour should have said is: you can't have both. If you end freedom of movement we'll have to leave the single market.

Corbyn personally actually believes in freedom of movement. (He and McDonnell almost certainly want us to leave the single market as it prevents most of the more radical things they'd like to do in terms of state aid, nationalisation and regulation. Their electoral success has given them the room to go even further now).

If we aren't going to stay in the single market, it is almost impossible to see how we stay in the customs union separately.

So, lots of waffle about how we'll get what we want if we ask politely is just noise. The EU has been crystal clear for months: unless you accept freedom of movement, you're not getting single market membership, and the best you'll get is something like what Canada has got. Labour has said it supports ending freedom of movement. Doing that is one of the things that enabled it to neutralises the immigration issue,

People who don't know what they're talking about then say "What is wrong with that, isn't a free trade deal as good as what we have?"

No it is not, that is Hard Brexit. That will cost the UK (very) conservatively £100bn (that is per annum, not overall). Put in perspective, Labour's commitment to reintroduce free University education with support costs about £12bn. Lots of other costs on top (eg NHS staffing).

People don't want to hear this. Brexit is becoming yesterday's news. It is so boring now. The parties raising it all got stuffed.

Post by **refitman** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:35 am

SpinningHugo wrote:
refitman wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote: Well the simple suggestion of talking nicely to the EU rather than declaring war would be a good start IMHO. And could lead somewhere quite good
McDonnell was very good on this, on the Ch4 Alternative show.

I am afraid I don't think he was.

In practical economic terms what matters is single market membership (not as repeated over and over again access) and (to a lesser extent) the customs union.

When asked, the public say they want us to stay in the single market, and to end freedom of movement.

What Labour should have said is: you can't have both. If you end freedom of movement we'll have to leave the single market.

Corbyn personally actually believes in freedom of movement. (He and McDonnell almost certainly want us to leave the single market as it prevents most of the more radical things they'd like to do in terms of state aid, nationalisation and regulation. Their electoral success has given them the room to go even further now).

If we aren't going to stay in the single market, it is almost impossible to see how we stay in the customs union separately.

So, lots of waffle about how we'll get want we want if we ask politely is just noise. The EU has been crystal clear for months: unless you accept freedom of movement, you're not getting single market membership, and the best you'll get is something like what Canada has got. Labour has said it supports ending freedom of movement. Doing that is one of the things that enabled it to neutralises the immigration issue,

People who don't know what they're talking about then say "What is wrong with that, isn't a free trade deal as good as what we have?"

No it is not, that is Hard Brexit. That will cost the UK (very) conservatively £100bn (that is per annum, not overall). Put in perspective, Labour's commitment to reintroduce free University education with support costs about £12bn. Lots of other costs on top (eg NHS staffing).

People don't want to hear this. Brexit is becoming yesterday's news. It is so boring now. The parties raising it all got stuffed.

McDonnell wasn't good in making the point that, if you want anything from Brexit, you need to talk to people? That you can't go in banging desks and stamping feet?

His point wasn't about getting what you want, it was about the entire approach to Brexit and how May and the Tories are going about it all wrong.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:37 am

NonOxCol wrote:
refitman wrote:Worth reading this twitter thread on the mess that is NI politics and just how bad May's DUP decision is: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
.Came here just now to suggest the same thread..

And me, I should get up earlier.

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:40 am

refitman wrote:]
McDonnell wasn't good in making the point that, if you want anything from Brexit, you need to talk to people? That you can't go in banging desks and stamping feet?

Which is fine. Being nice and polite is, no doubt, right as matter of procedure.

I am talking about the substance: what is it you're asking for?

Once You've said "no freedom of movement" it doesn't matter how nice and polite you are. You're out of the single market, no customs union, and you get Hard Brexit with all the costs that entails.

Unless you're prepared to keep freedom of movement, it won't matter how nice and polite you are.

Again, and I don't want to be rude, people are over-optimistically focusing on things other than what matters. We aren't going to get these mutually incompatible things with any kind of negotiating stance.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:44 am

Re Brexit, it's clearly an almighty f***up from any angle.

I have a recollection that Starmer said in so many words that to avoid the cliff edge there would have to be an interim deal that looked very like the Norway option, and that this might last for some years.

Anyone else remember that or am I imagining it?

Post by **refitman** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:49 am

gilsey wrote:
NonOxCol wrote:
refitman wrote:Worth reading this twitter thread on the mess that is NI politics and just how bad May's DUP decision is: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
.Came here just now to suggest the same thread..
And me, I should get up earlier.

You should have got up at 6 to watch the Australia/Fiji rugby match then.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 9:53 am

Graphic on adult social care access.
http://www.centreforwelfarereform.org/u ... 092016.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:09 am

Good morfternoon.

norman smith (@BBCNormanS)

DUP folk say no talks planned this weekend with Tories
June 10, 2017

(Politics Live, Guardian)

What happened to "stability by Monday"?

And thanks to adam and howsillyofme1 for last night's comments on the DUP.

And (another bee in my bonnet) I hope Labour is pursuing those voter registration cock-ups.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:13 am

SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:A good piece from John Harris

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ify-brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This really drives at one of the issues that we have discussed so often here. Friends here won't be surprised to know that I agree wholeheartedly

it turned out that Corbyn and his colleagues’ basic acceptance of Brexit left open the possibility of a Labour revival in its old, leave-voting heartlands. And eventually their argument that the Tories envisaged leaving Europe as another step towards some Thatcherite dystopia chimed with a big part of a big part of the public mood. For people, including me, who criticised their contortions on Europe, pointing this out entails eating a big helping of humble pie. That’s fine: it deserves no end of praise.

Yes. The problem with that kind of argument is that it thinks Brexit is just an electoral issue: what matters is the outcome in terms of votes.

Brexit is THE issue of our times. Billion turn on it. The damage to the UK of the Brexit that is coming is enormous: far, far greater than the difference in tax/spend between the Tory and Labour manifestos.

So, you really ought to adopt the right position on it, regardless of electoral advantage.

So, much as I'd love it if we could now stop Hard Brexit, it is really hard to see how we can given that we've already invoked article 50.

Brexit is for most people a low salience issue. That is one reason why the Tory campaign failed so badly (there are many others). You can't run a Brexit election: most people are completely clueless, they have no idea about the terrible damage about to hit us all. An issue they do care about (unfortunately) is immigration. That harmed Labour in 2015, but not now because it is thought "settled" because we're leaving the EU and no more Poles are coming. That is badly wrong, and will eventually go into reverse.

So yes, it is good that the left did well, and it is good that there seems room for a bolder approach on the economy from Labour. But the far more important election was 2016 (or if you like 2015 which led to it) and that was lost. That the parties who would try to reverse that (Greens, SNP, LIb Dems) did far worse than the two big parties who won't matters. The kind of politics I want lost really badly (as I said in advance it would).

All the glee over Theresa May, Nick Timothy, Fiona Hill and internal Tory wrangling looks juvenile. The art 50 clock is ticking, and disaster is inexorably coming our way. Our main opposition party is talking about issues that were really important before 2016, but on the big one hasn't got much to say other than "we'd do Brexit better". How?

People understand the NHS, schools, inflation, disability benefits, homelessness etc. They don't really understand how these are all going to deteriorate, badly, because of Brexit regardless of who is in power.

Trump, Brexit, Corbyn thrice: you are a know nothing blowhard. The only thing that has been consistently correct in your witterings is the fact that the opposite of what you say is going to happen, happens.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:14 am

My earlier post edited to remove a space

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:23 am

Certainly an interesting election where Kensington goes Red and Clay Cross ,birthplace of Skinner,rentstrikers against the Heath government goes Blue.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:27 am

NonOxCol wrote:
refitman wrote:Worth reading this twitter thread on the mess that is NI politics and just how bad May's DUP decision is: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Seconded with a passion. Came here just now to suggest the same thread. It is outstanding, and a greater indictment than most of the media is likely to produce, even now.

Wow

I don't think it's too much to ask for mainstream media giving some time informing or reminding people what the hell is going on in NI and the investigation of the DUP. Essentially, I was updated about this serious issue by word of mouth, by social media. Why did no mention of what's going on in NI now make it on yesterday morning's news headlines in the UK?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:29 am

Good-morning, everyone

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:35 am

According to the Ashcroft article posted yesterday, 33% of Labour voters want Brexit to go ahead as soon as possible, while 43% would like to prevent Brexit if possible.

Sitting on the fence and playing both sides enabled Labour to win votes from both these groups. If they form a government and proceed to negotiate Brexit, they will only be able to represent the interests of one of these groups of people, however. This is a simple fact. Either anti-immigration voters will be pleased with a Brexit outcome, or single market voters. There is no way both can be accommodated, unless you can persuade one side to change their minds. Everything McDonnell says suggests to me he is trying to persuade single market voters to embrace full Brexit rather than the other way round but even if I'm wrong and Corbyn and co ultimately wish to move towards a single market solution, their apparent current support for full Brexit will mean those who expect an end to immigration will eventually feel betrayed if their minds aren't changed. And I don't see how minds are changed if you don't make arguments in favour of single market membership over full Brexit.

This only becomes a problem for Labour if they form a government. It's already a problem for the Tories, because the DUP seem likely to insist on hard Brexit in return for their support, but pro-EU Tories may yet stymie such a deal by refusing to support a budget based on this arrangement because they're unhappy with how May has stuffed up. The report that they all "f***ing hate her" at least points to the potential for this, so until May has successfully steered a budget through parliament, I'm still seeing this election as something of an ongoing situation.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:40 am

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetory ... ation.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Our snap survey. Two in three Conservative Party members say that May should announce her resignation"

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 10:44 am

Willow904 wrote:According to the Ashcroft article posted yesterday, 33% of Labour voters want Brexit to go ahead as soon as possible, while 43% would like to prevent Brexit if possible.

Sitting on the fence and playing both sides enabled Labour to win votes from both these groups. If they form a government and proceed to negotiate Brexit, they will only be able to represent the interests of one of these groups of people, however. This is a simple fact. Either anti-immigration voters will be pleased with a Brexit outcome, or single market voters. There is no way both can be accommodated, unless you can persuade one side to change their minds. Everything McDonnell says suggests to me he is trying to persuade single market voters to embrace full Brexit rather than the other way round but even if I'm wrong and Corbyn and co ultimately wish to move towards a single market solution, their apparent current support for full Brexit will mean those who expect an end to immigration will eventually feel betrayed if their minds aren't changed. And I don't see how minds are changed if you don't make arguments in favour of single market membership over full Brexit.

This only becomes a problem for Labour if they form a government. It's already a problem for the Tories, because the DUP seem likely to insist on hard Brexit in return for their support, but pro-EU Tories may yet stymie such a deal by refusing to support a budget based on this arrangement because they're unhappy with how May has stuffed up. The report that they all "f***ing hate her" at least points to the potential for this, so until May has successfully steered a budget through parliament, I'm still seeing this election as something of an ongoing situation.

I was wondering that, it gets more interesting if Tories move towards accepting freedom of Movement & market membership, where do Labour position themselves & what happens to the ukip types (although this could be more of a problem for Tories)

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:03 am

Willow904 wrote: I'm still seeing this election as something of an ongoing situation.

(cJA edit)

Yes, this, me too.
I didn't hear or see John McDonnell's latest and am unable to give a critique

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:05 am

tinybgoat wrote:I was wondering that, it gets more interesting if Tories move towards accepting freedom of Movement & market membership, where do Labour position themselves & what happens to the ukip types (although this could be more of a problem for Tories)

(cJA edit)

I'd like to see what happens there too
Labour sit tight while the Tory-created Brexit fiasco gets rumbled by the Tory party ?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:08 am

Former minister Ed Vaizey indicated that Tory MPs were actively discussing May’s position...

Vaizey said he hoped the election result would soften May’s stance on Brexit, adding: “I hope in the next few days we will see a clear acknowledgement that a ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’ is off the table, that we are going for a Brexit that is going to secure jobs and investment.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/li ... d87e2f54e6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:08 am

tinybgoat wrote:
Willow904 wrote:According to the Ashcroft article posted yesterday, 33% of Labour voters want Brexit to go ahead as soon as possible, while 43% would like to prevent Brexit if possible.

Sitting on the fence and playing both sides enabled Labour to win votes from both these groups. If they form a government and proceed to negotiate Brexit, they will only be able to represent the interests of one of these groups of people, however. This is a simple fact. Either anti-immigration voters will be pleased with a Brexit outcome, or single market voters. There is no way both can be accommodated, unless you can persuade one side to change their minds. Everything McDonnell says suggests to me he is trying to persuade single market voters to embrace full Brexit rather than the other way round but even if I'm wrong and Corbyn and co ultimately wish to move towards a single market solution, their apparent current support for full Brexit will mean those who expect an end to immigration will eventually feel betrayed if their minds aren't changed. And I don't see how minds are changed if you don't make arguments in favour of single market membership over full Brexit.

This only becomes a problem for Labour if they form a government. It's already a problem for the Tories, because the DUP seem likely to insist on hard Brexit in return for their support, but pro-EU Tories may yet stymie such a deal by refusing to support a budget based on this arrangement because they're unhappy with how May has stuffed up. The report that they all "f***ing hate her" at least points to the potential for this, so until May has successfully steered a budget through parliament, I'm still seeing this election as something of an ongoing situation.
I was wondering that, it gets more interesting if Tories move towards accepting freedom of Movement & market membership, where do Labour position themselves & what happens to the ukip types (although this could be more of a problem for Tories)

The fact that May went to the country for a mandate to negotiate a hard Brexit in the upcoming negotiations and instead lost her majority means there is no clear consensus now to leave the single market. The internal political dynamics of the Tory party and the strength and influence of its eurosceptics versus its europhiles will now come to the fore. The eurosceptic, anti-immigration leanings of Tory voters pull them one way, but the knowledge that Brexit will hurt us economically and will eventually be blamed on them even by those voters who wanted it also pulls them the other. Will the Tories sacrifice long term prosperity for short term political support, now they actually find themselves looking down the barrel of the Brexit gun?

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:14 am

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 82681.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The strange tale of the DUP, Brexit, a mysterious £425,000 donation and a Saudi prince

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:20 am

Willow904 wrote:According to the Ashcroft article posted yesterday, 33% of Labour voters want Brexit to go ahead as soon as possible, while 43% would like to prevent Brexit if possible.

Sitting on the fence and playing both sides enabled Labour to win votes from both these groups. If they form a government and proceed to negotiate Brexit, they will only be able to represent the interests of one of these groups of people, however. This is a simple fact. Either anti-immigration voters will be pleased with a Brexit outcome, or single market voters. There is no way both can be accommodated, unless you can persuade one side to change their minds. Everything McDonnell says suggests to me he is trying to persuade single market voters to embrace full Brexit rather than the other way round but even if I'm wrong and Corbyn and co ultimately wish to move towards a single market solution, their apparent current support for full Brexit will mean those who expect an end to immigration will eventually feel betrayed if their minds aren't changed. And I don't see how minds are changed if you don't make arguments in favour of single market membership over full Brexit.

This only becomes a problem for Labour if they form a government. It's already a problem for the Tories, because the DUP seem likely to insist on hard Brexit in return for their support, but pro-EU Tories may yet stymie such a deal by refusing to support a budget based on this arrangement because they're unhappy with how May has stuffed up. The report that they all "f***ing hate her" at least points to the potential for this, so until May has successfully steered a budget through parliament, I'm still seeing this election as something of an ongoing situation.

Indeed very much reflects my thinking.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:36 am

Yesterday, published five o'clock on a Friday afternoon...

Clouds gather over UK economy as data points to lacklustre growth
Small gains in industrial output and hung parliament add to fears that uncertainty will further dent already weak prospects

The figures from the Office for National Statistics suggested the economy was already struggling before this latest bout of political uncertainty. They showed manufacturing output rose 0.2% in April after falling 0.6% in March. That was well below economists’ forecast for a 0.9% rise in a Reuters poll.

Britain’s economy made a lacklustre start to the the second quarter, according to official figures on Friday that added to gloom about the UK’s growth prospects following the inconclusive election results.

Manufacturing output and broader industrial output made only small gains in April, dashing economists’ forecasts for a rebound for the economy after a slow start to 2017, which has put the UK at the bottom of the European growth league.

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

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:41 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40230407" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Hawaiian pizza inventor Sam Panopoulos dies aged 83"

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 11:47 am

Willow904 wrote:
The fact that May went to the country for a mandate to negotiate a hard Brexit in the upcoming negotiations and instead lost her majority means there is no clear consensus now to leave the single market. The internal political dynamics of the Tory party and the strength and influence of its eurosceptics versus its europhiles will now come to the fore. The eurosceptic, anti-immigration leanings of Tory voters pull them one way, but the knowledge that Brexit will hurt us economically and will eventually be blamed on them even by those voters who wanted it also pulls them the other. Will the Tories sacrifice long term prosperity for short term political support, now they actually find themselves looking down the barrel of the Brexit gun?

What has become clear is that the only Brexit available is a Hard Brexit. So

1. You can't end freedom of movement, and stay in the single market

2. You can't remain in the customs union without staying in the single market.

So the options are 1. No Brexit or 2. Hard Brexit.

This only really became clear after last June. I had thought we could try to stay in the EEA, but as most have taken the vote as being one to end freedom of movement, that is not going to be possible.

Which is one reason (in addition to a belief that they couldn't blow a 20 point lead) that the Tories went for GE. This had become apparent.

So what now?

I had thought that another election soon was possible, but on reflection I don't think so. The economy is deteriorating because of Brexit. This was the Tories' window of opportunity. The plan must have been: go for Brexit, have another election in 5 years time when the worst of the economic impact had dissipated. I don't see any good plan for them now. (Unless it is to be decisive, change leader, run a proper campaign where you promise lots of goodies to match Labour's goodies, and try again in the autumn.)

On Brexit, the biggest issue by far, the question is whether Labour continues to adopt the same approach as it did on art 50: vote for it because that is to their electoral advantage. If Labour was whipped for it, there might be a blocking majority to stop a "Tory" Brexit (ie the only one possible).

I don't know. My guess is that Labour under its current leadership won't do that. We'll get the same approach as we did to art 50. Brexit won't be stopped but we may see Corbyn as PM. King of the ash heap.

May is finished, but that is just trivia. Politics as gossip.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 12:01 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
The fact that May went to the country for a mandate to negotiate a hard Brexit in the upcoming negotiations and instead lost her majority means there is no clear consensus now to leave the single market. The internal political dynamics of the Tory party and the strength and influence of its eurosceptics versus its europhiles will now come to the fore. The eurosceptic, anti-immigration leanings of Tory voters pull them one way, but the knowledge that Brexit will hurt us economically and will eventually be blamed on them even by those voters who wanted it also pulls them the other. Will the Tories sacrifice long term prosperity for short term political support, now they actually find themselves looking down the barrel of the Brexit gun?
What has become clear is that the only Brexit available is a Hard Brexit. So

1. You can't end freedom of movement, and stay in the single market

2. You can't remain in the customs union without staying in the single market.

So the options are 1. No Brexit or 2. Hard Brexit.

This only really became clear after last June. I had thought we could try to stay in the EEA, but as most have taken the vote as being one to end freedom of movement, that is not going to be possible.

Which is one reason (in addition to a belief that they couldn't blow a 20 point lead) that the Tories went for GE. This had become apparent.

So what now?

I had thought that another election soon was possible, but on reflection I don't think so. The economy is deteriorating because of Brexit. This was the Tories' window of opportunity. The plan must have been: go for Brexit, have another election in 5 years time when the worst of the economic impact had dissipated. I don't see any good plan for them now. (Unless it is to be decisive, change leader, run a proper campaign where you promise lots of goodies to match Labour's goodies, and try again in the autumn.)

On Brexit, the biggest issue by far, the question is whether Labour continues to adopt the same approach as it did on art 50: vote for it because that is to their electoral advantage. If Labour was whipped for it, there might be a blocking majority to stop a "Tory" Brexit (ie the only one possible).

I don't know. My guess is that Labour under its current leadership won't do that. We'll get the same approach as we did to art 50. Brexit won't be stopped but we may see Corbyn as PM. King of the ash heap.

May is finished, but that is just trivia. Politics as gossip.

There will be another election within a year.

We will end up with the Norway option as transitional for maybe a decade.

Brexit will ultimately be soft.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 12:03 pm

If you don't have the authority to remove a pillock like Michael Fallon . . .

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 12:06 pm

Congratulations!

go 12:02

Theresa May has spoken with Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and New Zealand’s prime minister Bill English.

A Downing Street spokesperson said the two prime ministers congratulated May on the election, which saw her party lose 13 seats and its overall majority. (Politics Live, Guardian)

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 12:19 pm

PorFavor wrote:Congratulations!

go 12:02

Theresa May has spoken with Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and New Zealand’s prime minister Bill English.

A Downing Street spokesperson said the two prime ministers congratulated May on the election, which saw her party lose 13 seats and its overall majority. (Politics Live, Guardian)

Lost seats in an election she didn't need to have and plunged us into an even more unstable state...and it's said that they congratulated her?

That's just bizarre.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 10 Jun, 2017 12:23 pm

I think AU and NZ were stifling laughter while they did it
Why officially ring up with 'congratulations' except to call attention to what she's lost?