FlyTheNest

A haven
It is currently Mon 23 Jul, 2018 7:42 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 7:10 am 
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:22 pm
Posts: 3176
Location: Wombwell, United Kingdom
Has thanked: 856 times
Been thanked: 5678 times
Morning all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 7:46 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
I don't often link Rentoul, but found this quite insightful

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bre ... 08666.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 8:12 am 
Offline
Chief Whip

Joined: Thu 02 Oct, 2014 7:44 am
Posts: 1149
Has thanked: 4362 times
Been thanked: 3220 times
Morning.

Why did anyone ever take this wretched little mincebrain seriously?

https://twitter.com/montie/status/941078513486098432


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 8:18 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
NonOxCol wrote:
Morning.

Why did anyone ever take this wretched little mincebrain seriously?

https://twitter.com/montie/status/941078513486098432

Indeed.

True colours showing through all over the place after last night's vote.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 8:26 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
On which, Labour Brexit rebels who voted FOR the Grieve amendment

Ronnie Campbell
John Mann
Dennis Skinner

AGAINST
Frank Field
Kate Hoey

The other usual rebels didn't vote as far as I can see

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2 ... Withdrawal


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 9:50 am 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1920
Has thanked: 12936 times
Been thanked: 3911 times
https://www.politico.eu/article/david-d ... h-destiny/
"The Brawler : The Brexit secretary has a recurring date with his own destiny."
Quote:
David Davis is cold.
It’s winter and 4º C in downtown Warsaw, and the U.K. Brexit secretary has left his coat behind in London. He’s standing in just his suit in front of the city’s main war memorial.

Quote:
His image in Westminster is of a bruiser — “thick as mince, lazy as a toad, & vain as Narcissus,” is how Dominic Cummings, the former campaign director of the Vote Leave campaign, put it in a typically acerbic tweet.
The reality is that he’s less the “knuckleduster” of Westminster lore and more of a boy scout — a bit of a nerd who can’t sit still.

Hmm, Isn't the boy scout motto 'Be prepared'?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 9:57 am 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1920
Has thanked: 12936 times
Been thanked: 3911 times
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-to-u ... s-phase-2/
"EU to UK: You’re not special"
Quote:
If the EU had to pick a theme song for Phase 2 of the Brexit talks, Gotye’s “ Somebody That I Used to Know ” could be the leading contender...

Quote:
...Put simply, the U.K. opted for a breakup and the EU is going to put loyal friends before its ex.
Or as Gotye, the Belgian-born musician, sings it: “You didn’t have to cut me off … Now you’re just somebody that I used to know.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 10:05 am 
Offline
Chief Whip

Joined: Thu 02 Oct, 2014 7:44 am
Posts: 1149
Has thanked: 4362 times
Been thanked: 3220 times
Nice find:

https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status ... 8068872194


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:04 am 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 10187
Has thanked: 19881 times
Been thanked: 18038 times
Good morfternoon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:05 am 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7592
Has thanked: 759 times
Been thanked: 16332 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
On which, Labour Brexit rebels who voted FOR the Grieve amendment

Ronnie Campbell
John Mann
Dennis Skinner

AGAINST
Frank Field
Kate Hoey

The other usual rebels didn't vote as far as I can see

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2 ... Withdrawal


Graham Stringer - perhaps the most likely Labour MP to vote with Field/Hoey - was "ill" apparently.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:09 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
On which, Labour Brexit rebels who voted FOR the Grieve amendment

Ronnie Campbell
John Mann
Dennis Skinner

AGAINST
Frank Field
Kate Hoey

The other usual rebels didn't vote as far as I can see

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2 ... Withdrawal


Graham Stringer - perhaps the most likely Labour MP to vote with Field/Hoey - was "ill" apparently.

I noticed praise for a Plaid MP (I think) who did make it to vote for Amendment 7 despite being quite poorly.

In 2017, should there not be a mechanism for MPs who are properly, doctor's note ill to be able to vote remotely?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4886
Has thanked: 10127 times
Been thanked: 12017 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
On which, Labour Brexit rebels who voted FOR the Grieve amendment

Ronnie Campbell
John Mann
Dennis Skinner

AGAINST
Frank Field
Kate Hoey

The other usual rebels didn't vote as far as I can see

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2 ... Withdrawal


Graham Stringer - perhaps the most likely Labour MP to vote with Field/Hoey - was "ill" apparently.

I noticed praise for a Plaid MP (I think) who did make it to vote for Amendment 7 despite being quite poorly.

In 2017, should there not be a mechanism for MPs who are properly, doctor's note ill to be able to vote remotely?


The informal practice of "pairing" is the usual mechanism to account for illness, but under May this practice has been temporarily dispensed with. I think pairing is used elsewhere, such as Australia. Would be interested if any other countries have tried anything else to deal with the problem.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:25 am 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
On which, Labour Brexit rebels who voted FOR the Grieve amendment

Ronnie Campbell
John Mann
Dennis Skinner

AGAINST
Frank Field
Kate Hoey

The other usual rebels didn't vote as far as I can see

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2 ... Withdrawal


Graham Stringer - perhaps the most likely Labour MP to vote with Field/Hoey - was "ill" apparently.


I think this highlights the problem.

Come 2019 Labour will only oppose if there is a chance of winning. As with the art 50 vote, the calculation will be that the price in popularity is too high to oppose Brexit. Indeed, voting down Brexit with a deal in favour of no deal Brexit makes much less sense than voting to trigger art 50 unconditionally.

So, as the Campaing Group \, Hoey and Field actually support Brexit, the bulk of the rest of Labour, as last time, will make the calculation that they may as well support the government. No doubt there'll be the few principled opponents who will join the handful of Tory rebels, but nowhere near enough.

Starmer, no doubt, will try to make lots of noise about the European Charter or siome such minor point, and then fall in behind Corbyn,

Which is why you shouldn't support the two Brexit parties.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:27 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
Willow904 wrote:
The informal practice of "pairing" is the usual mechanism to account for illness, but under May this practice has been temporarily dispensed with. I think pairing is used elsewhere, such as Australia. Would be interested if any other countries have tried anything else to deal with the problem.

Pairing seems very sensible, but when you get down to these wafer thin majorities it's unlikely to be reliable. I seem to recall very sick people being literally wheeled into the House in the Major era.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:30 am 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7592
Has thanked: 759 times
Been thanked: 16332 times
A famous instance of that during the 1979 vote of no confidence, of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:33 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
On which, Labour Brexit rebels who voted FOR the Grieve amendment

Ronnie Campbell
John Mann
Dennis Skinner

AGAINST
Frank Field
Kate Hoey

The other usual rebels didn't vote as far as I can see

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2 ... Withdrawal


Graham Stringer - perhaps the most likely Labour MP to vote with Field/Hoey - was "ill" apparently.


I think this highlights the problem.

Come 2019 Labour will only oppose if there is a chance of winning. As with the art 50 vote, the calculation will be that the price in popularity is too high to oppose Brexit. Indeed, voting down Brexit with a deal in favour of no deal Brexit makes much less sense than voting to trigger art 50 unconditionally.

So, as the Campaing Group \, Hoey and Field actually support Brexit, the bulk of the rest of Labour, as last time, will make the calculation that they may as well support the government. No doubt there'll be the few principled opponents who will join the handful of Tory rebels, but nowhere near enough.

Starmer, no doubt, will try to make lots of noise about the European Charter or siome such minor point, and then fall in behind Corbyn,

Which is why you shouldn't support the two Brexit parties.

Shirley the prospect of a final vote makes it much less likely that the final offer will be Hard Brexit. Demonstrably, this is likely to fail in the current House.

So, the eventual choice for MPs may be between Hard (no deal) and Soft (deal) Brexit.

If that happened there would be an opportunity for Brussels to move the whole EU, insofar of course as they want to do so, towards UK Soft Brexit. In that case, the final vote could be de facto to Remain.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 11:52 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -mutineers

Polly Toynbee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 12:36 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Shirley the prospect of a final vote makes it much less likely that the final offer will be Hard Brexit. Demonstrably, this is likely to fail in the current House.

So, the eventual choice for MPs may be between Hard (no deal) and Soft (deal) Brexit.

If that happened there would be an opportunity for Brussels to move the whole EU, insofar of course as they want to do so, towards UK Soft Brexit. In that case, the final vote could be de facto to Remain.


Very unlikely indeed given the position of the UK opposition. There are a few soft Brexit Tories who can be peeled off, but the leadership of Labour doesn't support soft Brexit as it doesn't fit with its "socialism in one country" Bennite fantasy world. McDonnell, the person you need to pay attention to not Starmer, has been quite clear.

Which is why you should support another party.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 12:49 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
John McDonnell said
Quote:
We want to be as close to the single market as we possibly can to get tariff-free access and also to ensure that we protect jobs and the economy overall. With regards to the Customs Union, a Customs Union, again exactly the same. [...] We think we are the only party that can bring together our country again. The country was really divided over Brexit. We’ve got to reach what we think is a traditional British compromise which brings both sides together, those who voted to leave and those who voted to remain, in a compromise which is trying to get the best we possibly can in terms of protecting jobs and the economy and that means the benefits of the single market and the customs union but overcoming some of the perceived disbenefits that motivated people to vote for Brexit.

For me, McDonnell is indeed being quite clear and saying "Soft Brexit + Soft Remain" in so many words.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 1:08 pm 
Online
Whip

Joined: Sun 29 Nov, 2015 1:24 pm
Posts: 975
Has thanked: 4022 times
Been thanked: 1622 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
John McDonnell said
Quote:
We want to be as close to the single market as we possibly can to get tariff-free access and also to ensure that we protect jobs and the economy overall. With regards to the Customs Union, a Customs Union, again exactly the same. [...] We think we are the only party that can bring together our country again. The country was really divided over Brexit. We’ve got to reach what we think is a traditional British compromise which brings both sides together, those who voted to leave and those who voted to remain, in a compromise which is trying to get the best we possibly can in terms of protecting jobs and the economy and that means the benefits of the single market and the customs union but overcoming some of the perceived disbenefits that motivated people to vote for Brexit.

For me, McDonnell is indeed being quite clear and saying "Soft Brexit + Soft Remain" in so many words.


Complete tariff-freedom looks impossible, see TBG's second Politico link, above . And any deal is going to take much longer than a few years ? Must check on the Norway/Swiss agreements but there are problems there too ...

General point -- rather than 'protecting jobs' it's surely all about limiting the inevitable job-losses ?

More to say, but thunder getting close !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 1:41 pm 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1920
Has thanked: 12936 times
Been thanked: 3911 times
https://news.sky.com/story/tory-whips-s ... y-11170026
Quote:
During the voting, some old fashioned whipping was applied by the Government. Philip Hammond, the Chancellor, was witnessed dragging new Tory MP Vicky Ford through the No lobby.
Gavin Williamson, the Defence Secretary who was Chief Whip until six weeks ago, was seen giving new Scottish Tory MP Paul Masterton a hard time on the green benches. Once a whip?
Earlier it was reported that whips had been accused of reducing a female MP to tears. A male whip was alleged to have used "bully boy tactics" that left the MP trembling and crying in the Commons.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 1:46 pm 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1920
Has thanked: 12936 times
Been thanked: 3911 times
https://news.sky.com/story/after-govern ... t-11170049
"After Government defeat, the Commons will now steer May towards soft Brexit" (Faisal Islam)

Quote:
Parliament now has one hand on the Brexit steering wheel. There's not much the Brexit establishment, the former rebels, can do about it, as not much was done to resist transition or a £40bn financial settlement.
Their votes are banked in order merely to get any sort of Brexit at all. It is the mutineers with leverage in this internal Tory negotiation over exactly what sort.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:02 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
frog222 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
John McDonnell said
Quote:
We want to be as close to the single market as we possibly can to get tariff-free access and also to ensure that we protect jobs and the economy overall. With regards to the Customs Union, a Customs Union, again exactly the same. [...] We think we are the only party that can bring together our country again. The country was really divided over Brexit. We’ve got to reach what we think is a traditional British compromise which brings both sides together, those who voted to leave and those who voted to remain, in a compromise which is trying to get the best we possibly can in terms of protecting jobs and the economy and that means the benefits of the single market and the customs union but overcoming some of the perceived disbenefits that motivated people to vote for Brexit.

For me, McDonnell is indeed being quite clear and saying "Soft Brexit + Soft Remain" in so many words.


Complete tariff-freedom looks impossible, see TBG's second Politico link, above . And any deal is going to take much longer than a few years ? Must check on the Norway/Swiss agreements but there are problems there too ...

General point -- rather than 'protecting jobs' it's surely all about limiting the inevitable job-losses ?

More to say, but thunder getting close !

Thanks for these points frog


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:06 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7592
Has thanked: 759 times
Been thanked: 16332 times
tinybgoat wrote:
https://news.sky.com/story/after-government-defeat-the-commons-will-now-steer-may-towards-soft-brexit-11170049
"After Government defeat, the Commons will now steer May towards soft Brexit" (Faisal Islam)

Quote:
Parliament now has one hand on the Brexit steering wheel. There's not much the Brexit establishment, the former rebels, can do about it, as not much was done to resist transition or a £40bn financial settlement.
Their votes are banked in order merely to get any sort of Brexit at all. It is the mutineers with leverage in this internal Tory negotiation over exactly what sort.


And I suspect a significant reason for Dacre's rage last night is that he has realised this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:06 pm 
Offline
Chancellor

Joined: Mon 23 Feb, 2015 8:23 am
Posts: 1920
Has thanked: 12936 times
Been thanked: 3911 times
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 10376.html
"Brexit: No renegotiation if MPs reject deal Theresa May gets, EU leader warns"
Quote:
“Xavier Bettel, the prime minister of Luxembourg, said the UK would not be given the opportunity to renegotiate.
“No,” he told reporters when asked. “To think Theresa May will negotiate something, we will negotiate something, and then again [Ms May] will go back to Westminster is not good for the position of the negotiations.
Westminster should trust that Theresa May will do the best for the UK. Westminster shouldn’t, even before we start negotiations to have in their heads that they don’t trust the prime minister.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:12 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
John McDonnell said
Quote:
We want to be as close to the single market as we possibly can to get tariff-free access and also to ensure that we protect jobs and the economy overall. With regards to the Customs Union, a Customs Union, again exactly the same. [...] We think we are the only party that can bring together our country again. The country was really divided over Brexit. We’ve got to reach what we think is a traditional British compromise which brings both sides together, those who voted to leave and those who voted to remain, in a compromise which is trying to get the best we possibly can in terms of protecting jobs and the economy and that means the benefits of the single market and the customs union but overcoming some of the perceived disbenefits that motivated people to vote for Brexit.

For me, McDonnell is indeed being quite clear and saying "Soft Brexit + Soft Remain" in so many words.



I love that McDonnell quote. It is typically disengenuous, and he is taking us for fools.

" tariff-free access"

He loves repeating that phrase.

As, surely by now, you must know, the tariffs are not the problem. No doubt we can get pretty close to eliminating tariffs, as Canada has done. The point is the *regulatory* compliance and mutual recognition. That is the important bit,, not the tariffs. Tariffs are what nineteenth century Brexiteers like IDS and Fox focus on as well. The regulatory recognition is what makes up the single market, not the tariffs which are comparatively trivial.

Everything before. during and especially after the referendum reveals that Corbyn and McDonnell take the same view on the EU and the single market as the rest of the Campaign Group.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:17 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4886
Has thanked: 10127 times
Been thanked: 12017 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
John McDonnell said
Quote:
We want to be as close to the single market as we possibly can to get tariff-free access and also to ensure that we protect jobs and the economy overall. With regards to the Customs Union, a Customs Union, again exactly the same. [...] We think we are the only party that can bring together our country again. The country was really divided over Brexit. We’ve got to reach what we think is a traditional British compromise which brings both sides together, those who voted to leave and those who voted to remain, in a compromise which is trying to get the best we possibly can in terms of protecting jobs and the economy and that means the benefits of the single market and the customs union but overcoming some of the perceived disbenefits that motivated people to vote for Brexit.

For me, McDonnell is indeed being quite clear and saying "Soft Brexit + Soft Remain" in so many words.


"Overcoming the perceived disbenefits". While maintaining the benefits of SM and CU. How, exactly? Either we regain control of immigration by leaving the SM and losing the economic benefits and reciprocal freedom of movement throughout the EU for UK citizens, thus disappointing remain voters, or we accept freedom of movement of some degree or other and all the other rules to maintain the economic benefits of the SM and disappoint leave voters. There is no compromise I can fathom. Anymore than I can see a way of resolving the Irish border problem without making one group or another extremely unhappy.

McDonnell can afford such vagueness, Labour aren't in power. But if they were and he was coming out with such unrealistic guff I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in them, I'm afraid. Ed Miliband said right at the start that if it came down to a choice between controlling immigration and the economic benefits of the SM, and it very likely will, we should put the SM first and I agree. I have no idea if McDonnell agrees, however, which leaves me feeling rather in the dark about Labour's Brexit stance. Presumably it will become clear eventually, but I have no particular expectation it will be to my liking, tbh.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:17 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
tinybgoat wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-vote-parliament-european-council-xavier-betel-luxembourg-a8110376.html
"Brexit: No renegotiation if MPs reject deal Theresa May gets, EU leader warns"
Quote:
“Xavier Bettel, the prime minister of Luxembourg, said the UK would not be given the opportunity to renegotiate.
“No,” he told reporters when asked. “To think Theresa May will negotiate something, we will negotiate something, and then again [Ms May] will go back to Westminster is not good for the position of the negotiations.
Westminster should trust that Theresa May will do the best for the UK. Westminster shouldn’t, even before we start negotiations to have in their heads that they don’t trust the prime minister.”

Over the years I've always been so pleased that our media have turned to the Prime Minister of Luxembourg to help steer our national debates :twisted:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:21 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
John McDonnell said
Quote:
We want to be as close to the single market as we possibly can to get tariff-free access and also to ensure that we protect jobs and the economy overall. With regards to the Customs Union, a Customs Union, again exactly the same. [...] We think we are the only party that can bring together our country again. The country was really divided over Brexit. We’ve got to reach what we think is a traditional British compromise which brings both sides together, those who voted to leave and those who voted to remain, in a compromise which is trying to get the best we possibly can in terms of protecting jobs and the economy and that means the benefits of the single market and the customs union but overcoming some of the perceived disbenefits that motivated people to vote for Brexit.

For me, McDonnell is indeed being quite clear and saying "Soft Brexit + Soft Remain" in so many words.


"Overcoming the perceived disbenefits". While maintaining the benefits of SM and CU. How, exactly? Either we regain control of immigration by leaving the SM and losing the economic benefits and reciprocal freedom of movement throughout the EU for UK citizens, thus disappointing remain voters, or we accept freedom of movement of some degree or other and all the other rules to maintain the economic benefits of the SM and disappoint leave voters. There is no compromise I can fathom. Anymore than I can see a way of resolving the Irish border problem without making one group or another extremely unhappy.

McDonnell can afford such vagueness, Labour aren't in power. But if they were and he was coming out with such unrealistic guff I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in them, I'm afraid. Ed Miliband said right at the start that if it came down to a choice between controlling immigration and the economic benefits of the SM, and it very likely will, we should put the SM first and I agree. I have no idea if McDonnell agrees, however, which leaves me feeling rather in the dark about Labour's Brexit stance. Presumably it will become clear eventually, but I have no particular expectation it will be to my liking, tbh.

The one thing in here that is largely, continually ignored is the possibility, nay likelihood, that the EU will have changed by the time we get to the end of this ridiculous process.

Don't forget that McDonnell and Corbyn talk regularly to the EU and other EU leaders.

Just imagine you were a really smart EU "leader" in these circumstances.....

Again, I'm clear that the EU will not shift towards the UK position to their disadvantage, but there may be a sweet spot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:25 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 10187
Has thanked: 19881 times
Been thanked: 18038 times
Quote:
Nigel Farage‏Verified account @Nigel_Farage
19h

My contempt for career politicians knows no bounds.

Ed Miliband

@Ed_Miliband

And mine for people who travel thousands of miles to endorse a groper of young girls who also happens to be a racist homophobe. Time for a period of silence. https://twitter.com/nigel_farage/status ... 9772718080
10:25 PM - Dec 13, 2017 (HuffPost)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:30 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14839
Has thanked: 81898 times
Been thanked: 13500 times
Willow904 wrote:
---
"Overcoming the perceived disbenefits". While maintaining the benefits of SM and CU. How, exactly? Either we regain control of immigration by leaving the SM and losing the economic benefits and reciprocal freedom of movement throughout the EU for UK citizens, thus disappointing remain voters, or we accept freedom of movement of some degree or other and all the other rules to maintain the economic benefits of the SM and disappoint leave voters. There is no compromise I can fathom. Anymore than I can see a way of resolving the Irish border problem without making one group or another extremely unhappy.

McDonnell can afford such vagueness, Labour aren't in power. But if they were and he was coming out with such unrealistic guff I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in them, I'm afraid. Ed Miliband said right at the start that if it came down to a choice between controlling immigration and the economic benefits of the SM, and it very likely will, we should put the SM first and I agree. I have no idea if McDonnell agrees, however, which leaves me feeling rather in the dark about Labour's Brexit stance. Presumably it will become clear eventually, but I have no particular expectation it will be to my liking, tbh.
(cJA edit)

Think of Gordon Brown's five economic tests as a model preventing undesirable action while remaining open-minded.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:39 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 8:26 pm
Posts: 7592
Has thanked: 759 times
Been thanked: 16332 times
Another zinger from Ed :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:40 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14839
Has thanked: 81898 times
Been thanked: 13500 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
tinybgoat wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-vote-parliament-european-council-xavier-betel-luxembourg-a8110376.html
"Brexit: No renegotiation if MPs reject deal Theresa May gets, EU leader warns"
Quote:
“Xavier Bettel, the prime minister of Luxembourg, said the UK would not be given the opportunity to renegotiate.
“No,” he told reporters when asked. “To think Theresa May will negotiate something, we will negotiate something, and then again [Ms May] will go back to Westminster is not good for the position of the negotiations.
Westminster should trust that Theresa May will do the best for the UK. Westminster shouldn’t, even before we start negotiations to have in their heads that they don’t trust the prime minister.”

Over the years I've always been so pleased that our media have turned to the Prime Minister of Luxembourg to help steer our national debates :twisted:
Are Bettel's comments translations into English? I'll try to find that and his context. It matters - meaning can be twisted.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:51 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4886
Has thanked: 10127 times
Been thanked: 12017 times
@PaulfromYorkshire

I think it's a good thing that EU citizens can enjoy equal rights in all EU countries,as we have now, enforced by the ECJ. Any other kind of immigration agreement has the potential to be more exploitative, presumably what Tory Brexiters are after.
I'm just struggling to see what your "sweet spot" actually looks like that makes leave voters happy, without making remain voters unhappy, if only the EU did something differently. What precisely are the changes you're thinking of?

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 2:52 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14839
Has thanked: 81898 times
Been thanked: 13500 times
citizenJA wrote:
---
Think of Gordon Brown's five economic tests as a model preventing undesirable action while remaining open-minded.
(cJA edit)

I mean the device itself - the economic tests in this context aren't my point.
"Sure, the UK will adopt the Euro, absolutely...there's just five things I've got to make sure of first...oh, not working out...well, we tried."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 3:12 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4886
Has thanked: 10127 times
Been thanked: 12017 times
citizenJA wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
---
"Overcoming the perceived disbenefits". While maintaining the benefits of SM and CU. How, exactly? Either we regain control of immigration by leaving the SM and losing the economic benefits and reciprocal freedom of movement throughout the EU for UK citizens, thus disappointing remain voters, or we accept freedom of movement of some degree or other and all the other rules to maintain the economic benefits of the SM and disappoint leave voters. There is no compromise I can fathom. Anymore than I can see a way of resolving the Irish border problem without making one group or another extremely unhappy.

McDonnell can afford such vagueness, Labour aren't in power. But if they were and he was coming out with such unrealistic guff I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in them, I'm afraid. Ed Miliband said right at the start that if it came down to a choice between controlling immigration and the economic benefits of the SM, and it very likely will, we should put the SM first and I agree. I have no idea if McDonnell agrees, however, which leaves me feeling rather in the dark about Labour's Brexit stance. Presumably it will become clear eventually, but I have no particular expectation it will be to my liking, tbh.
(cJA edit)

Think of Gordon Brown's five economic tests as a model preventing undesirable action while remaining open-minded.


Would it be cynical to suggest that Gordon Brown might have devised his 5 tests to provide the answer he already knew he wanted to get?

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 3:16 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:40 pm
Posts: 20525
Has thanked: 16940 times
Been thanked: 30183 times
Chesterfield Borough Council becomes UKIP free,sole representative becomes independent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 3:22 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:40 pm
Posts: 20525
Has thanked: 16940 times
Been thanked: 30183 times
Apparently Tesco paying temporary staff via pre-paid cards with a charge to access thus below minimum wage,is this legal?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 3:59 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm
Posts: 4211
Has thanked: 157 times
Been thanked: 2277 times
PfY

What dramatic changes in the EUs structure are you envisaging over the next 2 to 3 years?

I expect none at all, so I am a bit puzzled by your claim.

As for the idea that Macron and Merkel are chatting regularly with John McDonnell, I would suggest that is similarly far-fetched.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:05 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 11:40 pm
Posts: 20525
Has thanked: 16940 times
Been thanked: 30183 times
If SH didn't have an active discriminatory policy against particular targets,I would ask how voting for a particular party or not voting for particular parties in non existing elections would "help".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:15 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4886
Has thanked: 10127 times
Been thanked: 12017 times
HindleA wrote:
Apparently Tesco paying temporary staff via pre-paid cards with a charge to access thus below minimum wage,is this legal?


Shouldn't be. I'm sure it would fail minimum wage laws if challenged.

It's not exactly difficult to set up bank payments, even for temporary workers, so not sure what the justification would be to pay in this way, but if a company wanted to I'm pretty certain the onus would be on them to ensure those receiving wages in this way aren't disadvantaged compared to those paid in other ways.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:18 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
Willow904 wrote:
@PaulfromYorkshire

I think it's a good thing that EU citizens can enjoy equal rights in all EU countries,as we have now, enforced by the ECJ. Any other kind of immigration agreement has the potential to be more exploitative, presumably what Tory Brexiters are after.
I'm just struggling to see what your "sweet spot" actually looks like that makes leave voters happy, without making remain voters unhappy, if only the EU did something differently. What precisely are the changes you're thinking of?


Hi Willow

On the bit emphasised I agree wholeheartedly. However, I'm not sure Freedom of Movement is what it is often portrayed as. I found this piece from George Eaton a few months back interesting.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... mmigration

My worry is that the current regime can in fact be exploitative and can result in workers having to chase the free flow of capital around the continent. I salute and utterly welcome the right of Poles to live and work in the UK, but I'm not sure that all the Poles would have chosen to do so over a good job closer to home.

It's really not my area of expertise, but if we had as strong a regional policy as some other parts of the EU things could probably look very different without even changing the Single Market. I believe some changes to the Single Market could be envisioned that would be broadly welcomed outside London and Frankfurt and that would economically, rather than politically, manage immigration. But hands up I don't know how to do this.

I've said often that I would welcome a debate on what a more socialist internationalist EU would look like. Is the status quo really the best the EU can be?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:22 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
SpinningHugo wrote:
PfY

What dramatic changes in the EUs structure are you envisaging over the next 2 to 3 years?

I expect none at all, so I am a bit puzzled by your claim.

As for the idea that Macron and Merkel are chatting regularly with John McDonnell, I would suggest that is similarly far-fetched.

Well Merkel is fading. Spain is in trouble. Macron I really don't know.

The EU have been clear they would rather we stay. If they can see ways to appeal to UK voters while satisfying demand for change elsewhere in the Union why wouldn't they?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:33 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14839
Has thanked: 81898 times
Been thanked: 13500 times
Willow904 wrote:
---
Would it be cynical to suggest that Gordon Brown might have devised his 5 tests to provide the answer he already knew he wanted to get?
(cJA edit)

Not at all cynical of you to think what's likely true. I doubt he'd disagree. The answers he wanted were expressions of his reasons for caution. Those tests were safeguards keeping the UK out of a currency union. Brown was a knowledgeable, astute and capable chancellor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:34 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14839
Has thanked: 81898 times
Been thanked: 13500 times
Not all politicians are alike and many are capable people dedicated to public service.

edited to add this was only a thought I'd put in a post - I didn't mean for it to read like a rebuke


Last edited by citizenJA on Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:51 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14839
Has thanked: 81898 times
Been thanked: 13500 times
HindleA wrote:
Apparently Tesco paying temporary staff via pre-paid cards with a charge to access thus below minimum wage,is this legal?
Yes. It used to be. Or still is but it's not enforced. If a law isn't enforced, what good is it?
This isn't exactly what you were asking about but I found this in the labyrinth government website.
Quote:
There are no official estimates of minimum wage non-compliance and as such we use a range of data and information to inform our understanding of the scale and nature of minimum wage underpayment.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... t-2017.pdf
I'm looking for the allowable 'payment in kind' reimbursement employers can use. I'll post it if I find it.

Listening to May, she seems the sort who simply makes things legal.
"Statute of Labourers created by the English parliament under King Edward III in 1351..."
May's been re-reading it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 4:59 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 11:22 am
Posts: 14839
Has thanked: 81898 times
Been thanked: 13500 times
HindleA wrote:
---
...I would ask how voting for a particular party or not voting for particular parties in non existing elections would "help".
(cJA edit)

Hey, good point.

Is the theory we'll warm ourselves with our righteous political purity given off like heaters? Can we take shelter in that? How many calories are provided and what's the nutritional value? Or will we transcend the need for food too?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 5:05 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister
User avatar

Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 1:40 pm
Posts: 4886
Has thanked: 10127 times
Been thanked: 12017 times
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
@PaulfromYorkshire

I think it's a good thing that EU citizens can enjoy equal rights in all EU countries,as we have now, enforced by the ECJ. Any other kind of immigration agreement has the potential to be more exploitative, presumably what Tory Brexiters are after.
I'm just struggling to see what your "sweet spot" actually looks like that makes leave voters happy, without making remain voters unhappy, if only the EU did something differently. What precisely are the changes you're thinking of?


Hi Willow

On the bit emphasised I agree wholeheartedly. However, I'm not sure Freedom of Movement is what it is often portrayed as. I found this piece from George Eaton a few months back interesting.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... mmigration

My worry is that the current regime can in fact be exploitative and can result in workers having to chase the free flow of capital around the continent. I salute and utterly welcome the right of Poles to live and work in the UK, but I'm not sure that all the Poles would have chosen to do so over a good job closer to home.

It's really not my area of expertise, but if we had as strong a regional policy as some other parts of the EU things could probably look very different without even changing the Single Market. I believe some changes to the Single Market could be envisioned that would be broadly welcomed outside London and Frankfurt and that would economically, rather than politically, manage immigration. But hands up I don't know how to do this.

I've said often that I would welcome a debate on what a more socialist internationalist EU would look like. Is the status quo really the best the EU can be?


Except we're leaving the EU. We can stay in the single market if we obey its rules or we can "take back control" which essentially means more barriers than we have now. And, yes, we can change our mind and not leave, but we can't expect to change the rules of a club we have decided to quit. And even if we could, I'm very doubtful the kind of changes the Tory shire pensioners and xenophobic working class who voted for leave would require to change their minds are likely to be the kind of changes I'd like to see - Cameron wanted to reduce benefits and rights for EU workers for instance. I'd rather try to persuade a majority to accept the single market as it is, than try to move the whole of the EU further towards the nationalist leave voters way of thinking.

_________________
“Find a nice, self sufficient hilltop, and fortify it.” - The Kraken Wakes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 5:12 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 6:27 pm
Posts: 5987
Has thanked: 2064 times
Been thanked: 9888 times
Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
@PaulfromYorkshire

I think it's a good thing that EU citizens can enjoy equal rights in all EU countries,as we have now, enforced by the ECJ. Any other kind of immigration agreement has the potential to be more exploitative, presumably what Tory Brexiters are after.
I'm just struggling to see what your "sweet spot" actually looks like that makes leave voters happy, without making remain voters unhappy, if only the EU did something differently. What precisely are the changes you're thinking of?


Hi Willow

On the bit emphasised I agree wholeheartedly. However, I'm not sure Freedom of Movement is what it is often portrayed as. I found this piece from George Eaton a few months back interesting.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... mmigration

My worry is that the current regime can in fact be exploitative and can result in workers having to chase the free flow of capital around the continent. I salute and utterly welcome the right of Poles to live and work in the UK, but I'm not sure that all the Poles would have chosen to do so over a good job closer to home.

It's really not my area of expertise, but if we had as strong a regional policy as some other parts of the EU things could probably look very different without even changing the Single Market. I believe some changes to the Single Market could be envisioned that would be broadly welcomed outside London and Frankfurt and that would economically, rather than politically, manage immigration. But hands up I don't know how to do this.

I've said often that I would welcome a debate on what a more socialist internationalist EU would look like. Is the status quo really the best the EU can be?


Except we're leaving the EU. We can stay in the single market if we obey its rules or we can "take back control" which essentially means more barriers than we have now. And, yes, we can change our mind and not leave, but we can't expect to change the rules of a club we have decided to quit. And even if we could, I'm very doubtful the kind of changes the Tory shire pensioners and xenophobic working class who voted for leave would require to change their minds are likely to be the kind of changes I'd like to see - Cameron wanted to reduce benefits and rights for EU workers for instance. I'd rather try to persuade a majority to accept the single market as it is, than try to move the whole of the EU further towards the nationalist leave voters way of thinking.

I understand your view of the situation, but I suspect things are more fluid than this, mainly in an unknowable way because it's a long time until March 2019, which is the earliest we can leave. It could be much later.

Very importantly, the EU really doesn't want us to leave.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu 14 Dec, 2017 5:14 pm 
Offline
Prime Minister

Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 11:18 am
Posts: 10187
Has thanked: 19881 times
Been thanked: 18038 times
PTO


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], frog222, refitman and 44 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group