Saturday 15th and Sunday 16th July 2017

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:11 pm

PFY wrote:

tinyclanger2 wrote:
I would also add that there is a difference between not listening and genuinely not understanding despite best efforts. And asking the same question again in an attempt to do so.
I think the answer to your conundrum is that there should not have been a referendum.

Our democratic system (flawed though it surely is) should rely on our MPs representing us. The only thing we should really have a referendum on is changing the voting system.

Yes. And PR seems the least worst option.

Am still curious as to anyone's views on my earlier posts (some days ago) about eg: the death penalty, which we'd probably still have if we'd relied on a referendum. If we had a referendum tomorrow and voted for the death penalty, who would accept that as TWOTP and push it through anyway?

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:11 pm

(PS - apologies if I missed any existing responses)

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:15 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
PFY wrote:

tinyclanger2 wrote:
I would also add that there is a difference between not listening and genuinely not understanding despite best efforts. And asking the same question again in an attempt to do so.
I think the answer to your conundrum is that there should not have been a referendum.

Our democratic system (flawed though it surely is) should rely on our MPs representing us. The only thing we should really have a referendum on is changing the voting system.
Yes. And PR seems the least worst option.

Am still curious as to anyone's views on my earlier posts (some days ago) about eg: the death penalty, which we'd probably still have if we'd relied on a referendum. If we had a referendum tomorrow and voted for the death penalty, who would accept that as TWOTP and push it through anyway?

Horrible thing to say, but it would be difficult to resist in those circumstances. The only really foolproof thing there is not to have a referendum in the first place. Just as, yes, we shouldn't have had one on the EU - we know who to blame for that

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:16 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:What I would love to see is a movement in the UK that is pro-EU and forward looking, rather than nostalgic for an EU that, rightly or wrongly, we have voted to leave behind.

Are we ready to join Macron's conventions? Who will lead the debate here?

This is just missing for me. Maybe Labour are ready to pick it up. I hope so.

I 100% want to join you in this thinking - it's why I've posted a couple of times on thinktanks and position papers that are looking at the future of Europe. But try as I might I still (currently) have some activation energy missing that I need to get me over the hurdle of believing we are just standing by while the country is pointlessly taken apart.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:17 pm

Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:What I would love to see is a movement in the UK that is pro-EU and forward looking, rather than nostalgic for an EU that, rightly or wrongly, we have voted to leave behind.

Are we ready to join Macron's conventions? Who will lead the debate here?

This is just missing for me. Maybe Labour are ready to pick it up. I hope so.
When I look forward for the EU, I see opportunities that arise from the UK leaving, tbh. If I were living in a Eurozone country I'd see an EU that can focus better on shared economic interests, for instance. Or I see things such as two extremely different countries like Germany and Spain making enormous strides in renewable energy, achieved in very different ways, because of shared environmental goals. The UK always seems to be pushing back against these things, always vetoing, always trying to stop the actual good stuff. If the EU is going to be a success with the UK in it, we have to be properly in it. We have to be able to have conversations about things like an EU armed task force without having a complete nationalist meltdown. We have to be able to consider the possibility of dropping the pound for the Euro one day without our heads exploding. I don't think, as a nation we are there and right now I don't think we have leaders who have the desire and ability to get us there.

I think it could be better for the EU as a whole if the UK went for a Norwegian option. It certainly wouldn't be in their interests for us to hard Brexit, but I'm not sure its entirely in their interests to convince us to stay either. I do not even know if we can unilaterally revoke article 50. And I don't know if all 27 EU countries would agree. There's a lot of "ifs" around staying in. Whereas, a Norwegian option is clearly available, which is why I'd like to see Labour try to build a consensus for it. Although then I remember the Tories are in charge and suddenly it seems pointless talking about any of these things. They will give us a bad Brexit or no Brexit, most likely and while they remain in charge of the UK government, neither will be the best outcome for the EU itself.

I agree with much of this.

But there will be a lot of other EU states that don't want a full on Macron Verhofstadt EU yet. Maybe a two tier EU will emerge, with us in Tier 2. As you say, perhaps that would be a good thing and would allow us to stabilise our feelings towards the EU, without ruling out full accession one day.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:20 pm

SpinningHugo wrote:
Blair is Cassandra, blessed with prophecy, cursed because nobody believes him.

A bit hyperbolic, that.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:21 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:What I would love to see is a movement in the UK that is pro-EU and forward looking, rather than nostalgic for an EU that, rightly or wrongly, we have voted to leave behind.

Are we ready to join Macron's conventions? Who will lead the debate here?

This is just missing for me. Maybe Labour are ready to pick it up. I hope so.
I 100% want to join you in this thinking - it's why I've posted a couple of times on thinktanks and position papers that are looking at the future of Europe. But try as I might I still (currently) have some activation energy missing that I need to get me over the hurdle of believing we are just standing by while the country is pointlessly taken apart.

I'd love it if you shared some of those position papers etc.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:21 pm

seeingclearly wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:
Blair is Cassandra, blessed with prophecy, cursed because nobody believes him.
A bit hyperbolic, that.

Hyperbollocks I reckon

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:21 pm

HSOM wrote: I really don't understand what you are saying to be honest....you pose, what seems to me to be a rhetorical question, that actually leads to an answer that goes against what you want.

If an MP goes against the wishes of his or her constituents so flagrantly as you suggest, and they feel so strongly about it then they will be voted out

No this isn't what I was suggesting. I was asking about MPs in Remain areas who are being forced to vote Brexit through because their parties - whether Tory or Labour - had no party line during the referendum. So potentially an MP is now required to act according to the current party line (Brexit at all costs - not established at the time of the referendum), but not with the outcome of the referendum in their ward.

I understand that a greater proportion of wards voted for Brexit than did the proportion of people - it's not about that. It's about firing MPs for representing their constituents rather than their party. I don't have an answer, hence the question. Paul is right: it's a conundrum arising from the fact that we did something stupid which appears to be requiring us do things that are even more stupid.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:26 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Nice to see you too, Tubs.

Thank you. Won't be hanging about because I end up spending too long.

To Paul, I get where you're coming from a bit now. Positive agenda as well as a defensive one on the EU? That can work.

And when I say "Corbyn" on Brexit, I do mean Labour really. The "very real concerns" MPs are a huge nuisance.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:29 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Nice to see you too, Tubs.
Thank you. Won't be hanging about because I end up spending too long.

To Paul, I get where you're coming from a bit now. Positive agenda as well as a defensive one on the EU? That can work.

And when I say "Corbyn" on Brexit, I do mean Labour really. The "very real concerns" MPs are a huge nuisance.

Thanks.

And of course I get the defensive bit too.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:36 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:
PFY wrote:

tinyclanger2 wrote:
I would also add that there is a difference between not listening and genuinely not understanding despite best efforts. And asking the same question again in an attempt to do so.
I think the answer to your conundrum is that there should not have been a referendum.

Our democratic system (flawed though it surely is) should rely on our MPs representing us. The only thing we should really have a referendum on is changing the voting system.
Yes. And PR seems the least worst option.

Am still curious as to anyone's views on my earlier posts (some days ago) about eg: the death penalty, which we'd probably still have if we'd relied on a referendum. If we had a referendum tomorrow and voted for the death penalty, who would accept that as TWOTP and push it through anyway?

There's two things with this, I think.

The first very simple one is that no government should hold a referendum in the hope of winning a mandate for the status quo. It makes little sense. Referendums should be used to establish a mandate for something new the government wants to do. Offering people the option to choose to do something you have no desire or ability to do just seems stupid.

The second, more serious, point is around accountability. Can you hold the public accountable for a poor decision? Will the public hold themselves accountable? I suspect not. When a member of the public responds to a poll or votes in a referendum they merely express an opinion. They aren't enacting a death penalty, for instance, so will never personally have to take responsibility for the consequences of the policy in the way an MP does when they pass a vote in Parliament to make something happen. As such, an MP shouldn't be forced to vote for something just because there's a majority for it among the public.

So put these two things together and my answer to your question is "why on earth did MPs vote to hold a referendum on the death penalty when most of them are against it?"

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:37 pm

Welcome reversals not withstanding clear unequivocal ridding of the freeze and capping should have been at the forefront of the Manifesto.The framework of a centrist position,never mind "left".IMHO.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:39 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Nice to see you too, Tubs.
Thank you. Won't be hanging about because I end up spending too long.

To Paul, I get where you're coming from a bit now. Positive agenda as well as a defensive one on the EU? That can work.

And when I say "Corbyn" on Brexit, I do mean Labour really. The "very real concerns" MPs are a huge nuisance.

Yeah, though that tendency is quite a bit weaker (though still noisy) post-GE.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 2:48 pm

HindleA wrote:Welcome reversals not withstanding clear unequivocal ridding of the freeze and capping should have been at the forefront of the Manifesto.The framework of a centrist position,never mind "left".IMHO.

I assumed it had been overlooked rather than a deliberate omission, but then that just feeds into my perception of having the right intentions but possibly lacking the ability to actually follow through.

Still better than wrong intentions, with or without ability, mind.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 3:06 pm

Let's not forget that the manifesto was a compromise shall we - it tilted towards the leader's politics, but he certainly didn't get everything he might have wanted in it. As far as the benefits freeze and welfare more generally was concerned, its quite possible that Corbyn's past record on this (most notably, of course, two years ago almost to the day) meant the calculation was made that people would take him on trust on these matters, even if there weren't that many specific promises. And that does, generally, appear to have been the case.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 3:07 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Nice to see you too, Tubs.
Thank you. Won't be hanging about because I end up spending too long.

To Paul, I get where you're coming from a bit now. Positive agenda as well as a defensive one on the EU? That can work.

And when I say "Corbyn" on Brexit, I do mean Labour really. The "very real concerns" MPs are a huge nuisance.
Yeah, though that tendency is quite a bit weaker (though still noisy) post-GE.

That's true. They won't go quietly though, with Kipper Tories breathing down their necks. Maybe some will break for immigration plus jobs is better than no jobs, in a grudging way. There can't be that many Poles in Ashfield or wherever.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 3:31 pm

Some trains news. Stagecoach have lost £84m on their (Virgin branded) East Coast. They won't be the only ones to lose money. So it's not all "socialized losses", whatever the faults of the system. They are trying to get some changes to their contract- I'm told by an expert on another board that it is much harder to get out of contracts than it was. But it is possible they have been let down by Network Rail and have a point.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 3:56 pm

Point is a basic tenet of what should be a centrist sensible position as both principle and by far the most damaging to lives,particularly to those with no options given partial freezing of inadequate income shouldn't be questioned .The rest is peripherals upon which this hangs.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 4:24 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:What I would love to see is a movement in the UK that is pro-EU and forward looking, rather than nostalgic for an EU that, rightly or wrongly, we have voted to leave behind.

Are we ready to join Macron's conventions? Who will lead the debate here?

This is just missing for me. Maybe Labour are ready to pick it up. I hope so.
I 100% want to join you in this thinking - it's why I've posted a couple of times on thinktanks and position papers that are looking at the future of Europe. But try as I might I still (currently) have some activation energy missing that I need to get me over the hurdle of believing we are just standing by while the country is pointlessly taken apart.
I'd love it if you shared some of those position papers etc.

Will look them out and re/post

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 4:31 pm

Sorry if we've had this already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 41661.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Lowering the voting age to 16 could change the winner in 88 seats, ONS analysis shows

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 4:35 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 42481.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Theresa May didn't want to wear £995 leather trousers but was forced into it by aide, report claims
The Prime Minister was told to wear the chocolate-coloured Amanda Wakeley strides by her 'infuriating' former aide Fiona Hill, it is claimed

Which surely makes her a less appropriate PM than if she actually wanted to wear them

howsillyofme1 · Post by **howsillyofme1** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 4:37 pm

Too much focus on the minutiae in the Brexit discussions

Remember we are in a political decision - there is not much that is actually legally defined or needs legal intervention (apart from revocation of A50) but is mainly political and down to negotiations

I am basing Labour's position on the 6 tests and not Hugo's definition of what Labour means which is but a figment of his imagination backed up with the certainty of somebody lacking intellectually

The UK will not Leave until March 19, the negotiations will show that leaving the EU will cause significant economic harm and also there is nothing in the movement of people that necessarily prevents a fair immigration policy

On that last point I would like to say though, from a left wing perspective, the 'EU freedoms' do not contain enough protections in them and are still too allowing of corporations of acting immorally within the confines of the EU - I would really like the EU to admit that some of the Freedoms have been exploited and work needs to be done to fix some of that.

I would like to come back to someone who mentioned Labour's relations with the Jews. I personally find this is a hard one because I do see that this is hugely linked to the state of Israel and the appalling behaviour of that country and any criticism is seen as anti-semitic by the press. The behaviour of some within the party has exacerbated this. The main issues seem to be around the anti-Zionist area and in this wording has to be clear and some people have gone too far and should be called out for it

I though find Netanyahu a disgrace and the US uncriticising stance, especially under Trump to be a risk to peace in the Middle East.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 4:43 pm

http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en. ... -of-europe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The EESC is organising the Future of Europe debates to find out about the views, priorities and concerns of civil society organisations. These national debates are part of an ongoing broad discussion process about Europe in the months ahead, initiated by the European institutions across the EU and involving citizens, authorities and organisations alike.
....
Ideas presented during the debates will feed into the EESC's upcoming opinion on the Future of Europe to be issued in July 2017,

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 4:44 pm

http://www.eesc.europa.eu/?i=portal.en. ... -documents" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
includes the compilation of the outcome of national debates
http://www.eesc.europa.eu/resources/doc ... n---en.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (216 pp)

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:00 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... fell-tower" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The different standards in how fire services can respond to life-threatening tower block fires is a “postcode lottery”, the Fire Brigades Union has said

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:02 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/public-lead ... t-councils" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:29 pm

Good-afternoon, everyone

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:30 pm

Who ate all the biscuits?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:32 pm

What biscuits?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:43 pm

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/public-lead ... t-councils

"...the inquiry should...consider whether the traditional model of individual local authorities and housing associations carrying out their own procurement is viable. Few councils can afford the expertise required for major building and refurbishment projects, and existing processes carry the risk of unhealthy relationships that can facilitate fraud."

The entire article is good. Who monitors safe and responsible project progress and completion after contracts are awarded? Is necessary staff available in all councils? Do all councils have qualified personnel?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:57 pm

A series of random letters.Sent to be deciphered.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 5:59 pm

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... fell-tower

The different standards in how fire services can respond to life-threatening tower block fires is a “postcode lottery”, the Fire Brigades Union has said

Matt Wrack was on Newsnight last night talking about this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... t-14072017" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 6:44 pm

Afternoon all.

My twitter today seemed to be asking questions about Free Schools.

"FS policy allowed people who weren't HTs to set up schools - like Katharine Birbalisngh"
"Oh, so what about the expert help she had pre-opening?"
*deafening silence*

"But they're innovative!"
"So someone should do a study on what exactly they're doing that is innovative"
"Ah but too early to tell because of no results"
"But this policy is 7 years old - surely not too early to ask what exactly they're doing that is innovative?"
*deafening silence*

Emperor's new clothes...just accept that what they're doing couldn't ever be done before and don't question it.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 7:39 pm

Have a good night, everyone
love,
cJA

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 8:30 pm

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 41011.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
King's College London planning post-Brexit campus in Germany
'It’s a nice solution to get around this very stupid Brexit idea,' says Professor Stefan Bornstein

So basically people who "don't want to go to France" will stay in the UK and everyone else - including our businesses and universities - will just move to Europe.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sat 15 Jul, 2017 10:24 pm

EU Flag Mafia‏ @EUflagmafia 1h1 hour ago

Today an EU flag was passed by his minders to Mr Corbyn from #Euflagmafia member "please Mr corbyn keep us in the EU" he accepted the flag.X

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 12:03 am

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... hs-inquiry" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Inquiry finds series of major flaws, including lack of equipment, leading to ‘shocking’ death rate among those who needed emergency oxygen treatment

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 12:06 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 41011.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
King's College London planning post-Brexit campus in Germany
'It’s a nice solution to get around this very stupid Brexit idea,' says Professor Stefan Bornstein
So basically people who "don't want to go to France" will stay in the UK and everyone else - including our businesses and universities - will just move to Europe.

Indeed. Looking at it now, going to Oxford in the early 90a, doing it all in England and English could be seen as insular and a weakness. And sure, Oxford is a brand etc. But I can easily imagine when other places offer "Oxford plus immersion in German/ French etc".

Self-inflicted wound.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 12:19 am

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... er-message" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Corbyn to visit all 73 Tory marginals,apparently;that'll be mine then,which I may have mentioned previously.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 12:24 am

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... er-message

Corbyn to visit all 73 Tory marginals,apparently;that'll be mine then,which I may have mentioned previously.

Certainly look forward to him venturing up here again, interesting to see if he gets a better reception than earlier this year

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 6:48 am

No way back, the people have spoken, says Theresa May

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... xit-policy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 7:05 am

It was an interesting point made earlier about referenda and accountability. "The people" have either chosen Brexit (c. 38%) or are letting it happen because they can't be arsed arguing about it. The country will be devastated by Brexit - and eventually someone will be held to account. The people have expressed an ill-informed wish without understanding the need to be careful what you wish for.

The whole thing is happening, solely because no-one took it seriously enough to think that it would. Not sure that's a good enough reason.

Without proper engagement from the electorate you cannot have democracy. Given our woeful political understanding here I'd contest that this is not about what is democratic it's about what looks democratic.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 7:08 am

http://www.independent.co.uk/topic/brexit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
France 'wants to use Brexit to weaken City of London'
Former foreign office minister says French see British as 'adversaries' in forthcoming negotiations

I see we're still casting Europe as the enemy. We made ourselves adversaries, both with the referendum and our positioning after it. France doesn't want to use Brexit to weaken City of London, it wants to get what it can from the fact that the UK has elected to weaken itself.

Let's not forget that the architect of all this, Farage, was a banker.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 7:11 am

Former civil service head warns Theresa May of Brexit chaos
Gus O’Donnell says squabbles, unrealistic expectations and overburdened administration means UK is in for a ‘rough ride’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... il-service" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think that's diplomatic speak for what I said: we're 'ked.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 7:14 am

“The EU has clear negotiating guidelines, while it appears that cabinet members haven’t yet finished negotiating with each other, never mind the EU,” the crossbench peer warns. He calls on ministers to “start being honest about the complexity of the challenge”.

My point entirely.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 7:24 am

Gisela Stuart.
Born in Germany, educated in Manchester, MP in Birmingham.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06 ... edgbaston/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“My high point was June 23 last year,

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 7:32 am

Will Hutton wrote: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -salvation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It seems a distant prospect in 2017, after so much policy over so many years has been about reversing the state-led framework that produced that achievement. Our current account deficit now exceeds 5% of GDP, real wages and productivity are stagnant and there are no new companies or industries bursting through as in the 1930s. Last week, Labour peer Lord Adonis compared leaving the EU as a mistake analogous to appeasement. He is right. Brexiters Davis, Fox and Johnson are from the same anti-modern, delusional world view that produced the strategic foreign policy mistakes of the 1930s and the emasculation of the mixed-economy, state-led approach that underpinned the economic success of 1931-50.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 8:57 am

Willow904 wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:
Willow904 wrote:I should add, if someone representing the EU were saying these things about reform of freedom of movement of people rather than a UK politician, it would obviously different, but even Blair acknowledged the basic principles of the four freedoms would remain, so I think he is probably talking bollocks.
15th Nov 2016

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 18981.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The German Chancellor said the EU could not divide its four freedoms — movement of goods, capital, people and services — to allow Britain to restrict immigration while retaining tariff-free access to the market of close to 500 million people.
However, she opened the possibility of discussions on the framework of the free movement of people, which became a significant issue for the 52 per cent of Britons who backed leaving the EU.
Exactly. If you want to restrict immigration you can't get all the benefits of the single market. The way I see it, if you want to get a consensus for staying in the single market it's important to be honest about this. May isn't being honest because she says we are leaving the single market to gain control of our borders but is still saying we can get all the benefits of the single market. I guess I just want to see her called out on this more clearly than we've seen to date.

Actually my understanding was that Chancellor Merkel was making clear that the four freedoms were mandatory, but the actual details of Freedom of Movement might be open to some reform.

tinybgoat · Post by **tinybgoat** » Sun 16 Jul, 2017 9:08 am

SpinningHugo wrote:No way back, the people have spoken, says Theresa May

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... xit-policy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Maybe Labour should have gone with Lexit in the first place, campaigning for the positives of enabling a strong socialist Britain, unencumbered by the EU regulations.
Might have put some Tories off.
Might still ..