Thursday 4th January 2018
Posted: Thu 04 Jan, 2018 8:58 am
Morning!
Tony Blair
Tony Blair
discordantharmony wrote:Morning Paul.
Tony Blair and The White House hey, who would've thought it.
That was what you meant wasn't it
(edit for a very necessary comma)High fives all round in No 10 as Blair reinforcing case for Brexit dominates media cycle instead of NHS
Totally agree - Genuinely believe that the softly softly approach by Labour up till now has worked far better than that 15 minute interview this morning. But hey ho, what do I know........PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
It was just an all round eye roll really.
Labour have had a powerful start to 2018 with the Tories basically in hiding. Blair is just a distraction.
And:Q: No one thinks we will not be able to recruit EU nurses after Brexit.
Blair says EU workers are leaving.
He says the NHS is in a terrible state. But the government does not have the bandwidth to deal with it, he says.
I can't help but notice that his intervention has drawn an awful lot of agitated response from hard Brexit ideologues. They clearly don't want the idea of giving the electorate a final say on Brexit policy gaining traction.You are making it sound as if the metropolitan elite is against them.
Blair says there are elites and ordinary people on both sides. He says 17m people voted to leave, but 16m people voted to remain. Those 16m aren’t all elite.
That may be true, but I'm not sure it's relevant. Does anyone actually think the govt would be doing anything to improve the NHS if it wasn't for brexit?the NHS is in a terrible state. But the government does not have the bandwidth to deal with it, he says.
I'm sure it has worked far better in terms of holding together Labour support than openly opposing leaving the single market would have done, but I don't think it has been effective in exposing the cliff edge Eurosceptics are leading us over. Genuine concerns about negative impacts of Brexit are being suppressed with shrieks of "elites" and of being "undemocratic". It's a shame it had to be Blair to point out that 16m people can't all be "elites" and that democracy is an ongoing process, not a one off event, but I'd rather have him say it than no one say it at all.discordantharmony wrote:Totally agree - Genuinely believe that the softly softly approach by Labour up till now has worked far better than that 15 minute interview this morning. But hey ho, what do I know........PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
It was just an all round eye roll really.
Labour have had a powerful start to 2018 with the Tories basically in hiding. Blair is just a distraction.
The biggest ever polling of party members’ opinions shows that Tories are half as likely to support gay marriage as members of Labour, the Lib Dems or the SNP and significantly more supportive of the death penalty, obedience to authority and censorship of the media “to uphold moral standards”.
These people elect the party leader.on the economy there is what the authors describe as “a gulf between the Tory grassroots and the rest”: just 11% of Conservative members agree that austerity has been taken too far, against 98% for Labour, 93% in the SNP and 75% among Lib Dems.
""16m people can't all be "elites" and that democracy is an ongoing process, not a one off event, but I'd rather have him say it than no one say it at all.""Willow904 wrote:I'm sure it has worked far better in terms of holding together Labour support than openly opposing leaving the single market would have done, but I don't think it has been effective in exposing the cliff edge Eurosceptics are leading us over. Genuine concerns about negative impacts of Brexit are being suppressed with shrieks of "elites" and of being "undemocratic". It's a shame it had to be Blair to point out that 16m people can't all be "elites" and that democracy is an ongoing process, not a one off event, but I'd rather have him say it than no one say it at all.discordantharmony wrote:Totally agree - Genuinely believe that the softly softly approach by Labour up till now has worked far better than that 15 minute interview this morning. But hey ho, what do I know........PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
It was just an all round eye roll really.
Labour have had a powerful start to 2018 with the Tories basically in hiding. Blair is just a distraction.
I bet Tory membership doesn't hit six digits. Tories have more money than god though. Buys a lot of advertising.gilsey wrote:I think this makes it official, the tories really are nearly extinct, as a party.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tudy-finds" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The biggest ever polling of party members’ opinions shows that Tories are half as likely to support gay marriage as members of Labour, the Lib Dems or the SNP and significantly more supportive of the death penalty, obedience to authority and censorship of the media “to uphold moral standards”.These people elect the party leader.on the economy there is what the authors describe as “a gulf between the Tory grassroots and the rest”: just 11% of Conservative members agree that austerity has been taken too far, against 98% for Labour, 93% in the SNP and 75% among Lib Dems.
Under Ed Miliband Labour opposed holding an EU referendum at this time because we are still struggling to recover from the financial crisis. The Tories decided to hold a referendum anyway and whether they want to or not, it does hamper their ability to deal with the NHS and other domestic issues. I think their choice to create our current existential crisis over the EU is highly relevant. Before the referendum the EU wasn't an important issue for most voters. The NHS was. The Tories have focused on the wrong issue and yet they're not really being punished for that and they should be.gilsey wrote:That may be true, but I'm not sure it's relevant. Does anyone actually think the govt would be doing anything to improve the NHS if it wasn't for brexit?the NHS is in a terrible state. But the government does not have the bandwidth to deal with it, he says.
The other argument is that helping to deliver a cliff-edge crisis in the NHS is one of the main motivations of those behind the leave campaign and this is all just business as usual for them.Willow904 wrote:Under Ed Miliband Labour opposed holding an EU referendum at this time because we are still struggling to recover from the financial crisis. The Tories decided to hold a referendum anyway and whether they want to or not, it does hamper their ability to deal with the NHS and other domestic issues. I think their choice to create our current existential crisis over the EU is highly relevant. Before the referendum the EU wasn't an important issue for most voters. The NHS was. The Tories have focused on the wrong issue and yet they're not really being punished for that and they should be.gilsey wrote:That may be true, but I'm not sure it's relevant. Does anyone actually think the govt would be doing anything to improve the NHS if it wasn't for brexit?the NHS is in a terrible state. But the government does not have the bandwidth to deal with it, he says.
Yes, that is certainly true and a fair criticism. I personally feel the referendum result was very close, though, and that also should be respected. May actually asked for a mandate for her vision of Brexit at the election and didn't get it. For Brexit to go ahead under the Tories under such circumstances is on the very edge of what can be termed "democratic". We're adrift with no obvious consensus or democratic mandate for what happens next.frog222 wrote:""16m people can't all be "elites" and that democracy is an ongoing process, not a one off event, but I'd rather have him say it than no one say it at all.""Willow904 wrote:I'm sure it has worked far better in terms of holding together Labour support than openly opposing leaving the single market would have done, but I don't think it has been effective in exposing the cliff edge Eurosceptics are leading us over. Genuine concerns about negative impacts of Brexit are being suppressed with shrieks of "elites" and of being "undemocratic". It's a shame it had to be Blair to point out that 16m people can't all be "elites" and that democracy is an ongoing process, not a one off event, but I'd rather have him say it than no one say it at all.discordantharmony wrote:
Totally agree - Genuinely believe that the softly softly approach by Labour up till now has worked far better than that 15 minute interview this morning. But hey ho, what do I know........
The political wibbling is that the remainers say they respect the result of the ref, but do not really mean it !
I completely agree with this, but you're left with relying on the decency and civil responsibility of the conservative party to respect these things. This is why I can't see any way there will be an election before 2022 - I won't believe that any tory 'rebels' will vote to give Labour another shot at a general election unless it actually happens.Willow904 wrote:Yes, that is certainly true and a fair criticism. I personally feel the referendum result was very close, though, and that also should be respected. May actually asked for a mandate for her vision of Brexit at the election and didn't get it. For Brexit to go ahead under the Tories under such circumstances is on the very edge of what can be termed "democratic". We're adrift with no obvious consensus or democratic mandate for what happens next.
In many ways the question is whether May will break the conservative party by doing what should be the inevitable and ending up in or all but in the single market and/or customs union, or break the country by leaving with no or a very limited deal. I'm not confident that she'd chose to break the conservative party.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:FWIW I would advocate talking of avoiding Brexit rather than stopping it.
This for me leaves room for a bit of movement from the EU (that Hugo will ridicule me for even suggesting) and a relatively comfortable landing with the credibility of most leavers and remainers in tact.
Apart from the SNP.frog222 wrote:HoC as a whole bungled it .
Can anyone tell me why the conservative party inspires such faith from May that she will risk her own mental and physical health for the cause, quite apart from failing to put the country first?adam wrote:In many ways the question is whether May will break the conservative party by doing what should be the inevitable and ending up in or all but in the single market and/or customs union, or break the country by leaving with no or a very limited deal. I'm not confident that she'd chose to break the conservative party.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:FWIW I would advocate talking of avoiding Brexit rather than stopping it.
This for me leaves room for a bit of movement from the EU (that Hugo will ridicule me for even suggesting) and a relatively comfortable landing with the credibility of most leavers and remainers in tact.
All very good indeed - but why wait until now to make such a loud intervention.Make Brexit the Tory Brexit.
Make them own it 100%.
Show people why Brexit isn’t and never was the answer.
Open up the dialogue with European leaders about reforming Europe, a dialogue they’re more than willing to have now because they realise Brexit also damages Europe economically and politically.
At every PMQs nail each myth of the Brexit campaign, say why the Tory divisions are weakening our country - something only credible if we are opposed to Brexit not advocating a different Brexit, and challenge the whole farce head on of a Prime Minister leading our nation in a direction which even today she can’t bring herself to say she would vote for.
They're in power, they're very good at exercising power when they manage to cling to it and they are genuinely appalled at the thought of any Labour government, but especially a Corbyn and McDonnell led Labour government, coming to power in their place.gilsey wrote:Can anyone tell me why the conservative party inspires such faith from May that she will risk her own mental and physical health for the cause, quite apart from failing to put the country first?adam wrote:In many ways the question is whether May will break the conservative party by doing what should be the inevitable and ending up in or all but in the single market and/or customs union, or break the country by leaving with no or a very limited deal. I'm not confident that she'd chose to break the conservative party.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:FWIW I would advocate talking of avoiding Brexit rather than stopping it.
This for me leaves room for a bit of movement from the EU (that Hugo will ridicule me for even suggesting) and a relatively comfortable landing with the credibility of most leavers and remainers in tact.
True. I don't think pushing for a further referendum or election would be successful. I'm just making the point that those asking for it aren't being anti-democratic.adam wrote:I completely agree with this, but you're left with relying on the decency and civil responsibility of the conservative party to respect these things. This is why I can't see any way there will be an election before 2022 - I won't believe that any tory 'rebels' will vote to give Labour another shot at a general election unless it actually happens.Willow904 wrote:Yes, that is certainly true and a fair criticism. I personally feel the referendum result was very close, though, and that also should be respected. May actually asked for a mandate for her vision of Brexit at the election and didn't get it. For Brexit to go ahead under the Tories under such circumstances is on the very edge of what can be termed "democratic". We're adrift with no obvious consensus or democratic mandate for what happens next.
I think that brexit doesn't hamper their ability to deal with the NHS because they don't want to anyway. Brexit may be distracting other people from the NHS problems but for the tories it's good cover, ditto for UC.Willow904 wrote:Under Ed Miliband Labour opposed holding an EU referendum at this time because we are still struggling to recover from the financial crisis. The Tories decided to hold a referendum anyway and whether they want to or not, it does hamper their ability to deal with the NHS and other domestic issues. I think their choice to create our current existential crisis over the EU is highly relevant. Before the referendum the EU wasn't an important issue for most voters. The NHS was. The Tories have focused on the wrong issue and yet they're not really being punished for that and they should be.gilsey wrote:That may be true, but I'm not sure it's relevant. Does anyone actually think the govt would be doing anything to improve the NHS if it wasn't for brexit?the NHS is in a terrible state. But the government does not have the bandwidth to deal with it, he says.
Well quite.The leaders of the National Education Union have written to the education secretary Justine Greening over “sexist and homophobic” comments made by New Schools Network boss Toby Young.
Dr Mary Bousted and Kevin Courtney, the union’s joint general secretaries, have warned in a letter sent today that Young’s appointment to the board of the new universities regulator risks undermining the “vital work” done by the government to tackle sexism in schools.
Otoh we do "run elections again" . For the mom !AnatolyKasparov wrote:Somebody said on Twitter re the referendum being a close run thing - "yes it was, but so was the battle of Waterloo, there weren't many demands for that to be run again"
(a facetious quip yes, but with a kernel of truth)
As ever in our archaic system, this will come down to the marginal seats IMHO.gilsey wrote:Can anyone tell me why the conservative party inspires such faith from May that she will risk her own mental and physical health for the cause, quite apart from failing to put the country first?adam wrote:In many ways the question is whether May will break the conservative party by doing what should be the inevitable and ending up in or all but in the single market and/or customs union, or break the country by leaving with no or a very limited deal. I'm not confident that she'd chose to break the conservative party.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:FWIW I would advocate talking of avoiding Brexit rather than stopping it.
This for me leaves room for a bit of movement from the EU (that Hugo will ridicule me for even suggesting) and a relatively comfortable landing with the credibility of most leavers and remainers in tact.
Everything turns on Brexit.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:discordantharmony wrote:Morning Paul.
Tony Blair and The White House hey, who would've thought it.
That was what you meant wasn't it
It was just an all round eye roll really.
Labour have had a powerful start to 2018 with the Tories basically in hiding. Blair is just a distraction.
SpinningHugo wrote:Everything turns on Brexit.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:discordantharmony wrote:Morning Paul.
Tony Blair and The White House hey, who would've thought it.
That was what you meant wasn't it
It was just an all round eye roll really.
Labour have had a powerful start to 2018 with the Tories basically in hiding. Blair is just a distraction.
Want to cut ambulance waiting times? Brexit.
Want lower rail fares? Brexit.
Labour hasn't had a good start. It isn't relevant as it has an identical policy to the Tories on the single market and customs union.
Though we are then into the "referendums are not the same as elections" argument, of coursefrog222 wrote:Otoh we do "run elections again" . For the mom !AnatolyKasparov wrote:Somebody said on Twitter re the referendum being a close run thing - "yes it was, but so was the battle of Waterloo, there weren't many demands for that to be run again"
(a facetious quip yes, but with a kernel of truth)
Willow904 wrote:@gilsey.
Brexit raises the likelihood of a trade deal with the US that allows their medical companies access to the NHS, something it was looking more and more likely TTIP was not going to do.
Brexit is going to impact everything, that's the whole point. Corbyn and McDonnell see opportunities for radical reform completely free from the limitations of the EU. Personally I'm not convinced by the scope of those opportunities within the straightjacket of global conventions, whilst I'm very concerned by the scope for those on the right to reshape this country with the worst of the US as their inspiration if they manage to hold onto the reins.
If enough of the country is against leaving the single market, it should be possible for the opposition to join with Tory rebels to retain a close relationship with the EU and thus keep the US corporate vultures at arms length, but to get to that point I feel it important that the idea that we have choices about how to Brexit or even Brexit at all are still open to us. "Will of the people" and "respecting the referendum" are attempts to shut that debate down or, at least, even if genuinely meant, help the interests of those who want to shut that debate down.
We're stuck with it to the extent that we are committed to buying the piglet in the poke, but nobody knows how much we are paying for the bugger !AnatolyKasparov wrote:Though we are then into the "referendums are not the same as elections" argument, of coursefrog222 wrote:Otoh we do "run elections again" . For the mom !AnatolyKasparov wrote:Somebody said on Twitter re the referendum being a close run thing - "yes it was, but so was the battle of Waterloo, there weren't many demands for that to be run again"
(a facetious quip yes, but with a kernel of truth)
One I have sympathy with, and actually see as an argument to avoid the former as much as possible. However, we are - thanks to Dave - stuck with this one.....
I think specifically Hard Brexit is the cause. Soft Brexit on the assessment I saw is not too bad in the short term. Of course it's bad over time as we get rules written that don't suit us.SpinningHugo wrote:Everything turns on Brexit.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:discordantharmony wrote:Morning Paul.
Tony Blair and The White House hey, who would've thought it.
That was what you meant wasn't it
It was just an all round eye roll really.
Labour have had a powerful start to 2018 with the Tories basically in hiding. Blair is just a distraction.
Want to cut ambulance waiting times? Brexit.
Want lower rail fares? Brexit.
Labour hasn't had a good start. It isn't relevant as it has an identical policy to the Tories on the single market and customs union.
I think SM/CU is politically achievable if there is a consensus for it across party lines in Parliament and I suspect there could be. Presenting it to the electorate, especially Tory voters, will be very difficult of course, but coping with the consequences of a hard Brexit will also be very difficult and would be continually resisted by a large majority as would not Brexiting at all. Going forward, the relationship between those in the SM but not the EU will change with an economy as large as ours in it, so I see it as a starting point rather than an end point. Remaining in the CU would be better for Ireland but prevents greater trade autonomy. I would accept either in or out of the CU personally and don't know which would be easier to gain support for.howsillyofme1 wrote:Willow904 wrote:@gilsey.
Brexit raises the likelihood of a trade deal with the US that allows their medical companies access to the NHS, something it was looking more and more likely TTIP was not going to do.
Brexit is going to impact everything, that's the whole point. Corbyn and McDonnell see opportunities for radical reform completely free from the limitations of the EU. Personally I'm not convinced by the scope of those opportunities within the straightjacket of global conventions, whilst I'm very concerned by the scope for those on the right to reshape this country with the worst of the US as their inspiration if they manage to hold onto the reins.
If enough of the country is against leaving the single market, it should be possible for the opposition to join with Tory rebels to retain a close relationship with the EU and thus keep the US corporate vultures at arms length, but to get to that point I feel it important that the idea that we have choices about how to Brexit or even Brexit at all are still open to us. "Will of the people" and "respecting the referendum" are attempts to shut that debate down or, at least, even if genuinely meant, help the interests of those who want to shut that debate down.
Willow,
A quick question
I think having pretty identical membership with the EU for the SM is pretty well-supported on here. I also see the CU as being a real benefit and I cannot see how Ireland can be worked out without it as well (I live in a country outside CU and there is definitely a hard border)
Do you think that a SM/CU agreement (so more than Norway) would be politically achievable if we were outside the decision-making process. As I said above, I support the principles ofhaving that Relationship but would not support it if we had no influence in making the rules.
It is this balance that I find really hard to work out how we can make it work, apart from avoiding Brexit completely - which opens up some of the other points I have been making and where I know we would differ in tactics
Please summarize! No photos of cavorting tho!frog222 wrote:World at One on now , with Govey cavorting in wildflower meadows post- brexit
No photos on Radio4 Politically acute post-brexitery, but he himself appears completely oppposed to the Liam Fox love affaire with chlorinated chicken and drugged-up meat .Tubby Isaacs wrote:Please summarize! No photos of cavorting tho!frog222 wrote:World at One on now , with Govey cavorting in wildflower meadows post- brexit
I'm not talking about Corbyn and McDonnell's 'opportunities for radical reform', which may or may not exist, and indeed they may or may not be thinking about them.Willow904 wrote:@gilsey.
Brexit raises the likelihood of a trade deal with the US that allows their medical companies access to the NHS, something it was looking more and more likely TTIP was not going to do.
Brexit is going to impact everything, that's the whole point. Corbyn and McDonnell see opportunities for radical reform completely free from the limitations of the EU. Personally I'm not convinced by the scope of those opportunities within the straightjacket of global conventions, whilst I'm very concerned by the scope for those on the right to reshape this country with the worst of the US as their inspiration if they manage to hold onto the reins.
If enough of the country is against leaving the single market, it should be possible for the opposition to join with Tory rebels to retain a close relationship with the EU and thus keep the US corporate vultures at arms length, but to get to that point I feel it important that the idea that we have choices about how to Brexit or even Brexit at all are still open to us. "Will of the people" and "respecting the referendum" are attempts to shut that debate down or, at least, even if genuinely meant, help the interests of those who want to shut that debate down.