Page 1 of 1

Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 7:09 am
by refitman
Morning all.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 7:26 am
by HindleA
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 9:44 am
by RogerOThornhill
Morning all.

On the way to and from the newsagent I met the usual small group of parents with kids who hadn't read the communication from school properly and assumed that school was open today...one woman told me she definitely read an email saying it was Monday 7th....which I checked when I got home and of course it said Tuesday 8th...

Apparently Boris has used his weekly column to attack May's plan - yes, I was shocked too. I love Andrew Sparrow's first comment on the extract...
Like many of Johnson’s Brexit assertions, this is, even on the most generous of assessments, questionable.
:D

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 10:12 am
by adam
Tea spilt on laptop Saturday morning (not by me). Hoping it's just the keyboard that's knackered - think might have got away with just that. Time to check nature of 'accidental damage' cover on insurance and hope that I actually named the laptop as a specific valuable item (I think I did). Although my last experience with trying to make an insurance claim for something was so shite I ended up giving up and paying for the thing myself.

We have a nice shiny new building, supposed to have been ready beginning of last December, that we've moved into this morning. Not much works.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 10:16 am
by AnatolyKasparov
Good for the soul. Or something.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 11:48 am
by citizenJA
Good-morning, everyone

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 12:12 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
Morefternoon, even?

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 1:06 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
Fat nylon prick is confused representing the SDP on Politics Live (7,6).

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 1:13 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
Amusing clip from Owen Jones

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

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 1:14 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Morefternoon, even?
You don't spell it like that! ;-)

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 2:21 pm
by gilsey

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 2:21 pm
by PorFavor
Good morfternoon.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 2:47 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.
I stand corrected.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 3:32 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
Sour banyan alert!

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 4:41 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
Laura Kuenssberg
@bbclaurak

Sounds like PM won't be the one answering the Q that Corbyn has been granted in Commons later - all a bit fluid but sounds like No 10 are planning to send someone else

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 5:11 pm
by gilsey
Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, asks Barclay to rule out a no-deal Brexit.

Barclay says it is not enough to MPs to be against something. They have to decide what they want. Referring to the letter, signed by more than 200 MPs, urging the government to rule out a no-deal Brexit, he says those MPs favour a variety of alternative options.
Pot, kettle springs to mind.

What was PfY's anagram for Barclay?

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 5:33 pm
by gilsey
Interesting read.
https://gapingsilence.wordpress.com/201 ... from-here/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If the party’s committed to a Labour Brexit, that must mean that we know what one of those is – what kind of Brexit would be good for Labour and good for Britain. And if the answer’s ‘none’, there is no way the party can possibly admit it – not without going back on its endorsement of the referendum as a democratic process and all the commitments it’s made since the referendum. Heading towards March 29th denouncing the existing deal and demanding the impossible is probably as close to endorsing Remain as Labour – under any imaginable leader – can get, given the starting-point in 2016. (Which is to say, given that the Labour Party didn’t denounce the referendum and lead a campaign of abstention.)

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 5:34 pm
by AnatolyKasparov
His blog is generally good, if infrequently updated.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 5:52 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
gilsey wrote:
Hilary Benn, the Labour chair of the Commons Brexit committee, asks Barclay to rule out a no-deal Brexit.

Barclay says it is not enough to MPs to be against something. They have to decide what they want. Referring to the letter, signed by more than 200 MPs, urging the government to rule out a no-deal Brexit, he says those MPs favour a variety of alternative options.
Pot, kettle springs to mind.

What was PfY's anagram for Barclay?
He's a good one!

I think I went for "preach absently", but "banters cheaply", "peasantry belch", "patchy enablers" and "herby placentas" all have a certain charm ;-)

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 6:09 pm
by citizenJA
gilsey wrote:Interesting read.
https://gapingsilence.wordpress.com/201 ... from-here/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If the party’s committed to a Labour Brexit, that must mean that we know what one of those is – what kind of Brexit would be good for Labour and good for Britain. And if the answer’s ‘none’, there is no way the party can possibly admit it – not without going back on its endorsement of the referendum as a democratic process and all the commitments it’s made since the referendum. Heading towards March 29th denouncing the existing deal and demanding the impossible is probably as close to endorsing Remain as Labour – under any imaginable leader – can get, given the starting-point in 2016. (Which is to say, given that the Labour Party didn’t denounce the referendum and lead a campaign of abstention.)
That is good

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 7:06 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
citizenJA wrote:
gilsey wrote:Interesting read.
https://gapingsilence.wordpress.com/201 ... from-here/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If the party’s committed to a Labour Brexit, that must mean that we know what one of those is – what kind of Brexit would be good for Labour and good for Britain. And if the answer’s ‘none’, there is no way the party can possibly admit it – not without going back on its endorsement of the referendum as a democratic process and all the commitments it’s made since the referendum. Heading towards March 29th denouncing the existing deal and demanding the impossible is probably as close to endorsing Remain as Labour – under any imaginable leader – can get, given the starting-point in 2016. (Which is to say, given that the Labour Party didn’t denounce the referendum and lead a campaign of abstention.)
That is good
I thought Barry Gardiner on Ridge got as close as anyone has to explaining this clearly.

It's really important to keep on emphasising that May has got into her unenviable "hole" by having red lines that were irreconcilable.

One that hasn't been discussed for a while perhaps is the possibility of the UK paying for its special access, which is an impossibility for the ERG brigade.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 7:27 pm
by Willow904
PaulfromYorkshire wrote: I thought Barry Gardiner on Ridge got as close as anyone has to explaining this clearly.

It's really important to keep on emphasising that May has got into her unenviable "hole" by having red lines that were irreconcilable.

One that hasn't been discussed for a while perhaps is the possibility of the UK paying for its special access, which is an impossibility for the ERG brigade.
What exactly would this "special access" be, though? The economic benefit of the single market derives from the four freedoms of movement which turn external markets into one big internal market. You can only either be inside an internal market, which means accepting the four freedoms, or trade with it from the outside. There isn't really anything else. We can get very good terms trading with the EU from the outside, I'm sure, but this is the kind of deal Theresa May appears to be pursuing. I just can't quite see what Labour are offering that is different, except they would actively pursue a customs union, whereas May would just end up in one by default because there is no other acceptable solution to the Irish Border problem. Unless Labour would be willing to commit to the single market, but nothing Corbyn has said suggests this is likely. Without long term promotion of a single market solution it will be hard for Labour to pivot to that position anyway, I would have thought. Besides which, "people's vote" has now got expectations up over somehow being able to remain in the EU, squeezing any single market, soft Brexit compromise out of the picture as far as I can tell.

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 7:53 pm
by citizenJA
goodnight, everyone
love,
cJA

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 9:01 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote: I thought Barry Gardiner on Ridge got as close as anyone has to explaining this clearly.

It's really important to keep on emphasising that May has got into her unenviable "hole" by having red lines that were irreconcilable.

One that hasn't been discussed for a while perhaps is the possibility of the UK paying for its special access, which is an impossibility for the ERG brigade.
What exactly would this "special access" be, though? The economic benefit of the single market derives from the four freedoms of movement which turn external markets into one big internal market. You can only either be inside an internal market, which means accepting the four freedoms, or trade with it from the outside. There isn't really anything else. We can get very good terms trading with the EU from the outside, I'm sure, but this is the kind of deal Theresa May appears to be pursuing. I just can't quite see what Labour are offering that is different, except they would actively pursue a customs union, whereas May would just end up in one by default because there is no other acceptable solution to the Irish Border problem. Unless Labour would be willing to commit to the single market, but nothing Corbyn has said suggests this is likely. Without long term promotion of a single market solution it will be hard for Labour to pivot to that position anyway, I would have thought. Besides which, "people's vote" has now got expectations up over somehow being able to remain in the EU, squeezing any single market, soft Brexit compromise out of the picture as far as I can tell.
IMHO the wiggle room is around Freedom of Movement.

It can't be true that you need complete freedom of movement to have the Single Market, because such a thing has never existed.

It's not appealing because of the racist undertones, but restricting freedom of movement is not inherently racist. And IMHO there has to be some compromise somewhere or it's civil war!

Re: Monday 7th January 2019

Posted: Mon 07 Jan, 2019 9:56 pm
by PaulfromYorkshire
Something like this then

https://labourlist.org/wp-content/uploa ... et-2.0.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Common-Market-2.0