Forum menu
With 75 tories now having promised to vote it down, we are almost at the point at which corbyn couldn’t whip it through if he tried
If all the Tory MPs who said they'd sent their letters, some of whom even tweeting photos of said letters, actually had done, May would have survived 16 no confidence votes by now.
Its all posturing for consumption by whichever section of the electorate they're presently trying to lie too
Dissonance - you really do need to take your tinfoil helmet off for a bit, and get some fresh air outside the bunker
“**** business”
Her Majesty’s Government
As I understand it:
AstraZeneca accounts for 1% of our GDP.
Our contribution to the EU is 0.37% of our GDP.
Fishing is 0.04% of our GDP.
But yeah, **** business, it's all about the fish.
Pet insurance is a bigger business than fishing.
That line could be used against labour for decades decimating their voter base in the North. A great concern.
What on earth makes you think that?
On the other hand, I don't see them voting tory so perhaps another party would fill the void, which if the current voting system continues to prevail, will probably mean the tories cling on to power for a good while yet.
Pet insurance is a bigger business than fishing.
Stop everything, I have the solution:
Let's insure all the fish!
40 years of Neo Liberalism my arse...
We live in a country where education up to and including a degree is freely available to all.
We live in a country where Health Care is free at the point of delivery.
We live in a country where its very easy to start a business and a tax system that supports this reasonablly well.
We live in a country that has created and continues to provide a minimum wage/living wage.
We have a business environment that on the whole is free of corruption.
Its not perfect but it does provide opportunity- why do immigrants thrive here?
I was in school on the 1970s and went down the CSE route so no opportunity for A Levels or a Degree- it took me nearly 20 years after leaving school to get a Degree cia apprenticeship HNC etc
We live in a community (EU) which we can travel and work freely.
How much opportunity do you *ing want!
Sorry i forgot the "left behinds" don't want opportunity they want their "entitlement" and instant wealth.
I am a socialist and always will be but * sometimes its hard work.
binners, about 25 tories have said publicly that they have sent letters. IIRC. What is your list or are you just making up stuff?
This is my problem with Brexit i understand what JRM and his like want, but it will not be the "left behinds" who dig us out of the shit - they will sit on their fat arses and wait for the £36k manufacturing jobs to roll in and when they dont it will be the neo liberal middle classes fault.
Hard rain needs to fall.
Captain - If you missed it on Sunday its worth listening to Pienaars politics on Five live. It had the bloke on who's the head of the 1922 committee (Graham Brady?). He seemed quite affable but was really honest. He said that every time this happens he just laughs. He was saying how some MPs will tweet a photo of the letter they've apparently sent, yet he never receives them. Apparently they're all at it. Hence Rees Moggs humiliation (is everyone enjoying that as much as I am?)
What he was saying is that just because some MP says he's/she's written a letter, maybe even supplying a photo of said letter, don't assume they actually have. Its all political posturing.
I suspect that MPs very publicly saying they'll vote against something is more of the same. Whether they actually will or not...?
We live in a country where education up to and including a degree is freely available to all.
Only if your definition of "freely available" is "saddled with very large debt".
Made my heart glad to see JRM and his collection of sweaty gammons being compared to Dad's Army in the media.
How anyone can be "anti-elitist" and think that JRM is their ally is beyond me.
Debt that you only pay back when your income rises.
Debt that you only pay back when your income rises.
Thats still debt. Also the value of the degree has been devalued. As more people get one then the minimum qualification for a lot of entry jobs gets moved upward. In the past it was a subset needing degrees and most with A levels or whatever the equivalent was. Now it is masters vs degrees. So now you have to spend the years studying and not earning just to be in the same position as someone without that investment was in the past.
There are of course exceptions but look at many jobs which ask for degrees now. No actual need but if you dont get one you will need to be a lot more lucky.
There are of course exceptions but look at many jobs which ask for degrees now. No actual need but if you dont get one you will need to be a lot more lucky.
To be fair, laughable job requirements are nothing new. Back when I was looking for my first IT job I saw job ads for minimum-wage helpdesk roles that were asking for an MCSE (Microsoft accreditation which is a considerable amount of work and several exams). I'm convinced that most job specs are written by people who have no clue what the requirements actually are and just make stuff up, doubly so if a recruitment agency is involved.
I agree its not perfect but there is little excuse for not trying tp improve your lot.
We have a problem in thu6s country that is hidden by a lot of hard working immigrants. That will soon be in plain site.
Mate of mine runs a groundworks business (JCB type stuff) he needs lots of folks who only need to "drive" a shovel he pays £10 an hour and guarantees 48 hours so £25k a year in the North of England and provides all the safety gear and overalls, waterproofs etc. Most young lads last a week (unless they are Eastern European) and most of his regular crew is over 40. It drives him nuts.
As more people get one then the minimum qualification for a lot of entry jobs gets moved upward.
I have it! Make everyone leave school at 14, then employers won't be be able to insist on any academic qualifications, and everyone will get a job.
Alternatively, a modern ecomony requires a more skilled and educated (granted those two things only overlap, rather being the same thing) workforce.
It's the same as the immigrant argument… anger that the people wth the right skills, qualifications, education, aptitude or just damn work ethic are taking jobs off of "our lot"… no… if the British workforce aren't able to do the jobs, the jobs won't exist, or will be sited in another country where those workers are available.
Fewer kids going on to further education (including technical training as well as academic courses) mixed with making the country less appealing for immigrant workers, won't open up job opportunities for kids born here, it will drastically reduce them.
Wait, AZ contribute 1% of GDP?
What is U.K. GDP, £2trillion?
I think you need to check your sums!
AZ turnover is what, ~£20billion then?
The problem is that we've had successive governments who are quite happy for schools sited near sink estates to churn out unemployable semi-literates as long as the middle class kids carry on getting the grades to get them into uni and keep paying the fees. Selective education, dependent on postcode.
Until we address that, we're *ed. The only time I've worked with a large group of recent immigrants they were all highly skilled, and had been recruited from Eastern Europe due to total absence of suitably qualified UK born staff.
Theres a huge disconnect in our society between education and employment. And Brexit sure the * isn't going to fix it!
I think you need to check your sums!
You may be right actually. I need to find a canonical source for current figures, but in 2004 AZ's contribution to the UK GDP was £2.5bn and our overall GDP was £1.31tn. So that made it about 0.2% back then. 14 years later, 1% doesn't sound all that implausible but I can't immediately back it up as it's second-hand information.
This is also the third largest industry in the UK, contributing 10 per cent of the country’s GDP, with an employment of 73.000 people and a trade surplus of €3.3 billion.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/07/17/the-pharmaceutical-industry-is-at-risk-from-brexit/
AZ turnover is what, ~£20billion then?
2017 revenue : $22.5bn
https://www.astrazeneca.com/investor-relations/annual-reports/annual-report-2017.html
That’s global revenue, only their U.K. revenue could sensibly be used to compare to U.K. GDP.
Unless you want to look at the size of AZ relative to global GDP?
What on earth makes you think that?
You go on to agree with them. Its not that they switch to tories but that they switch to UKIP or someone else and so the tories get in (although there is a possible case to be made for people going to UKIP and then to tories)
Until we address that, we’re ****ed.
Sounds to me like we need a radical progressive govt who will invest massively in the education system, industry and infrastructure, free of the shackles of EU neoliberal anti-growth policies 🙂
Seriously though, you're right. But the centrist (both left and right) consensus is that we shouldn't raise taxes or borrow to provide that investment. The brextremists don't want any investment at all because they believe the magic of the market will solve it, which leaves...?
Debt that you only pay back when your income rises.
...to not very much. Add in unaffordable housing, low job security and crappy pension provision, there's little doubt that today's young people face significant challenges when compared to my generation.
Looks like a combination of May seeking late changes that go against Ireland's interests, plus France and Spain both wanting new carve outs, means no signing summit this weekend. May might as welll push meaningful vote into January now. Merry Christmas!
I think that suits her, gives MPs time to come to terms with deal & leaves even less time to call it off so they are forced to accept it rather than catastrophic no deal
With this deal am I going to be paying extra tax on my chocolates or is it business as usual?
Under the new laws, all brown chocolates will be sent back where they came from.
zippy, in theory according to this deal it's business as usual for another couple of years, no idea beyond that.
In reality brexit is dead so it's business as usual indefinitely.
With this deal am I going to be paying extra tax on my chocolates or is it business as usual?
Well, the deal not only includes the transition period, but the chance for that to be a lot longer than was previously muted (EU concesssion), and after that there is a backup plan of the whole of the UK keeping the current tariff regime for a long period of time (another EU concession)… so you could have the current tax level for another four or five years, rather than a cliff edge change next year. So MUCH better for your company than no deal.
Of course, that's all just (welcome) can kicking… the political uncertainty about what happens when we move out from under the EU's wing still makes longer term planning tricky.
Moggs humiliation (is everyone enjoying that as much as I am?)
Happy happy, joy joy.
<h1 class="headline">Theresa May threatens 'no Brexit at all' as senior Tories put new referendum on table</h1>
Take it she's going to do this unilaterally then?
"Take it she’s going to do this unilaterally then?"
29th March 2019:
The T1922 Maybot Brexitator smashes down the door of the ERG "High Command" Euro bunker.
Extending a bloodied, mechanical hand it speaks to a quivering JRM - "Come with me if you vont to dance..."
The self serving will continue to keep their end up and ensure that the critical industries / finance houses won’t lose out. The rest of us will be collateral damage. There’s always things that no ones thought of until someone shouts ‘what about xyz’ The people pushing this farce will be able to ride it out. However I could be wrong and it may be another ‘millennium bug’
The people pushing this farce will be able to ride it out. However I could be wrong and it may be another ‘millennium bug’
What you mean millions of people working tirelessly to make sure that the impacts of a change were caught and kept clear of critical systems.
The millennium bug is a great example of getting hold of a problem and dealing with it and putting enough resources to it so that nothing bad happens. This is not what is going on with Brexit.
No one knows what’s going on as it’s a game of brinkmanship by both sides. There will be winners and losers if it goes through, hopefully only in the short term until we cash in our ‘Special Relationship’ chip.
4 decades of integration with the EU to be reversed in 2 years with no consensus on what we will replace it with & certainly no plan on how to get there.
Damn right no one knows wtf is going on !
Cameron & Farage have a lot to answer for
Did anyone read the news about the population of isolated islanders, blissfully ignorant of the modern world, attempting to uphold their prehistoric way of life by physically attacking unfamiliar incomers to their island?
And in other news an American adventurer was killed by tribes people upon landing on North Sentinel Island in the Indian Ocean.
What you mean millions of people working tirelessly to make sure that the impacts of a change were caught and kept clear of critical systems.
The millennium bug is a great example of getting hold of a problem and dealing with it and putting enough resources to it so that nothing bad happens. This is not what is going on with Brexit.
Thanks Mike, you beat me to it and saved me from getting cross.
The Millennium Bug was a non-event because, as you say, a lot of people worked very, very hard to ensure that it was a non-event. I know, because I was one of them. At midnight on December 31st 1999 whilst most of the country was out getting ripped off their tits on Pomagne in the biggest party of the century, I was one of any number of other geeks across the world sitting on my own at work making sure that my months of graft were actually successful and the lights stayed on.
The ignorantly glib notion that it was all an overblown drama because nothing actually happened makes me want to kill kittens. No offence and all @bluerich, it's not your fault that you don't know, but it was a global triumph of collective engineering which should've been championed from the rooftops and instead the world went "oh, was that it? Ah well, see, I said it'd all be fine."
Corbyn is anti EU and didn’t really enthrall the voting public with his electioneering at best came across as a iced tea remainer. In fact parliament needs to have a look at itself for allowing Turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Far as I can tell with Corbyn, he isn't anti-EU (despite Binners' protestations, whom I usually agree with), rather he thinks it's broken and needs fixing.
In any case, he's at best a distraction currently. I don't really understand the obsession some people seem to have with him.
‘getting their tits ripped off on pomagne’
I think in my case it was full fat milk and Malibu!
I don’t have any obsession with him or any other politician or for that matter any other person.
In any case, he’s at best a distraction currently. I don’t really understand the obsession some people seem to have with him.
I suspect it's cos there's no one currently from the 'acceptable' wing of the labour party who can beat him or do a better job. That must be quite frustrating considering how useless he's supposed to be 🙂
Strangely, now that May has gone all BINO, JRM has been exposed as being all talk and no trousers, and Farage is busy hiding from US prosecutors, Corbyn could well turn out to be the flag carrier for brexit. How weird would that be?
I suspect it’s cos there’s no one currently from the ‘acceptable’ wing of the labour party who can beat him or do a better job.
Tom Watson would get my vote in a heartbeat. Starmer?
I would have thought Kier Starmer worth an each way bet in any future leadership bid.
Len McCluskey!
That starmer guy seems to be pretty reasonable from what I've read.
Corbyn just seems to have become a caracature.
Tom Watson would get my vote in a heartbeat. Starmer?
Got to be a woman in my opinion. Pick any of Thornberry, Rayner or Long-Bailey. Cooper would even have an outside chance if she could cast off the stain of new labour.
My summing up of JC chance of getting into No 10. He as 2 hopes.
Unfortunately they are Bob and No.
The only one of those who I have any real respect for is Starmer. Long-Bailey I don't know. I'll check her out
Watson is Ok ish but the rest are tainted by warmongering, plotting against Corbyn and thus supporting the tories or are simple policy vacuums - ie follow the papers not lead at all. anyone who did the briefing agaisnt Corbyn has done so much damage that they can never be rehabilitated IMO
Having said that they are probably more connected with reality that the Tory front bench But I would never vote for a labour party run by any of them bar Starmer.
I have been a lifelong labour supporter and voter up until a couple of elections ago
Lammy would get my vote. Very impressed with him.
Sadly, he seems to get a non stop barrage of racist mail with threats etc. Symptomatic of the current climate in the UK
Long Bailey looks a decent call actually from what I can find out about her.
Rayner and Long-Bailey are clearly being groomed for it. They've both had extensive image makeovers and media training to blunt some of the sharp edges they had before. They probably tried Thornberry too but she probably told the party apparatchiks to f*** off 🙂
Sounds cynical but I wonder if Watson's weight loss thing is also an image makeover to make him more appealing to the electorate?
I can’t think of any other reasons why certain Brexiteers would be so keen to get us out as soon as possible, regardless of the cost to anyone else.
Comes into force mid-2019
Not this old chesnut yet again, the UK has already enacted the legislation required by this directive - much of it yonks ago, but it is illustrative of how far off the mark so many of the presumed motives are.
Sounds cynical but I wonder if Watson’s weight loss thing is also an image makeover to make him more appealing to the electorate?
He was diagnosed with T2 diabetes, hence the (necessary) weight loss.
At midnight on December 31st 1999
We only found two things to fix on the night, but that's because we'd had more than half our staff working on testing/fixing/testing solidly for more than 2 years on legacy systems. The worst things were where our systems met external ones, or physical media, like cheque stationery, which meant coordination with other companies and regulatory bodies. It was, most definitely, not down to JUST ****ING BELEVING THAT EVERYTHING WILL BE ALRIGHT BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE WILL SORT IT ALL OUT IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
As for Labour… there is no time to change the leader… there is no time for a general election… there is only time for the Leadership to back the policy Labour members and voters want, and take advantage of a minority government losing the support of its own MPs, to get an amendment passed that calls for a confirmation referendum and a short extension to A50 to allow time for it. But that needs to happen this year. All this "not now, maybe later" spin just means, "not 'till it's too late to stop Brexit". It is the machinations of the Brexit backing leaders of a Brexit opposing party.
As much as we wouldn't like it to be so, there are two circles to be squared.
As much as i, personally, would like it to all just go away and remain as it was, it won't.
So...
We 'accept' the result of 2016 - we are to leave the EU
I appreciate the arguments that say it was 'only advisory', but we have to accept that, even if it had been as narrow a margin 'our' way, it would have put the argument to bed for a generation. Admit it - had it been 52-48 the other way, YOU would be saying 'we won, you lost etc' - and you'd have solid ground upon which to do so.
Make no mistake, the result was a mistake, but the question was asked and it was answered.
I wholeheartedly agree that a 'super' majority should have been necessitated, but it wasn't. There are obvious reasons for that, none of which help us particularly to understand where we are now. Actually they do, but that's not massively helpful in this narrative.
It also doesn't help to keep bleating 'advisory' at people, because the executive made it quite clear that even though this was an 'advisory' vote they would treat it as if it wasn't, even though it was. Parliamentary procedure is pretty oblique even to those who have eyes to see, which is why this was made so clear to the electorate from the outset.
We know well enough that this will not be good, in fact we may well be quite right to conclude it will be very bad.
... Or ...
We don't 'accept' the result of 2016 - we are to remain in the EU
Are we to thus disenfranchise 17m voters?
I appreciate the arguments that they were lied to, that there were xyz 'kinds of' Brexit they voted for. None of which were achievable.
They had their reasons, diffuse as they might have been, and they voted accordingly.
But they were asked and they answered - you can't decry them for that.
What i don't see from people is the consequence of ignoring the people of 2016 - apart from saying 'oh, well, most of them are dead anyway', which is not even mostly true.
This is an element of the debate that is being mentally 'glossed over' by people who are generally mentally quite cohesive because they just don't like it. Ignoring people does not come cost free.
This is going to eat us up for at least ten years, probably more like twenty.
A bit further ^up there i posited an alternative future in which a tight vote in favour of remain saw a leadership election in the Conservative party that elected a 'hard' brexiteer who forced through an EU exit anyway, after all it's as good as 50/50 right? How do you like them apples?
As Larkin noted, a miss can be as bad as a mile, as well as as good as one.
Ignoring people does not come cost free.
Agreed.
Ask someone who is 20 and watching this all unfold, someone who didn't have a vote in 2016 and is being told that they should have no say in what we do next year.
Those dead against asking the public what we should do next are ignoring people now, surely? They are saying we can't listen to what voters want now… that to even ask them is somehow "wrong". That to ask the people is to ignore them. Does that not sound a bit like double speak? Sure sounds odd to me.
Problem with pursuing brexit is that every deal that is presented is readily seem to be massively shitter than what we already have. So no sane MP will vote for it and the public won't support it.
I'd like to say this had come as a complete shock but of course it was obvious to anyone with the ability to think right from day one.
Good points, but to pick a couple
Admit it – had it been 52-48 the other way, YOU would be saying ‘we won, you lost etc’ – and you’d have solid ground upon which to do so.
Some would but I think there is enough awareness that there were /are a lot of (good) reasons why there were approx 17M people who felt sufficiently pissed off with the status quo to realise it needed changing. But you can't change the rules to a club you've resigned from very easily (made me laugh at Gove's reason for staying in the Cabinet, btw)
I don't see very much from the Leave side addressing that were approx 17M who wanted to remain as part of Europe and taking those views into account - it's their view or nothing at all, and in the stark absence of what their view entails, it's been left to Remainers to fill in those gaps which are now dismissed as scaremongering.
We don’t ‘accept’ the result of 2016 – we are to remain in the EU
Are we to thus disenfranchise 17m voters?
I appreciate the arguments that they were lied to, that there were xyz ‘kinds of’ Brexit they voted for. None of which were achievable.
They had their reasons, diffuse as they might have been, and they voted accordingly.
While respecting that point, a lot has happened since and we are a lot 'smarter' (YMMV) about what Leave really means. It is not inappropriate for the Government to say that we aren't going to get the New Empire / Unicorn riding future that was 'promised' and are we still happy about that?
I was ardent Remain, still am. I went through the How could we anger bit after the result. Then I went into the 'but as a democracy we voted for it' stage and I still believe that, but as every day passes and more is known and still nothing comes from the Leave / ERG side of any actionable merit, that position changes. We have the gun pointed at our foot, we have the finger tightening on the trigger, someone needs to take this gun off us before it all goes bang.
An advisory referendum based on bare faced lies and funded by illegal money.
If it was a footballl match Leave would have had their win withdrawn, been relegated and docked 20 points.
The way it will work out is as follows and something I thought from day one;
- Government takes referendum result and says they will follow it (as they have to)
- Government takes the full 2 years trying to get a deal that we know was never going to get the backing of remainers or leavers
- Only option left is No deal and the majority of parliament are simply not going to let that happen so we end up revoking A50.
So rather than just dismissing the result they have pretended to try to leave but publicly displayed it didn't make any sense given the viable options. How upset the 17MM people will be who knows, I imagine a few million will be as they voted for reasons that hey still feel strongly about while the rest didn't know what they were doing and may not even notice what has happened.
That's how it worked out kerley but I don't believe that May had the foresight or intellect to have planned it.
Just catching up on this generally depressing thread and noticed this quote (thanks @raybanwomble):
We use a common-sense approach. We speak plainly. That’s what makes the UK different. We call a spade a spade and don’t need theory.’
Its both hilariously incorrect and also a prime example of why there should never have been a referendum.
Are we to thus disenfranchise 17m voters?
Looking at it purely logically, there are two options.
Disenfranchise 48% of the electorate and devastate the country.
Disenfranchise 52% of the electorate and not devastate the country.
Second option seems much safer to me.
Disenfranchise 48% of the electorate and devastate the country.
Disenfranchise 52% of the electorate and not devastate the country.
Nicely put, I shall be stealing that. I'll be saying "half", though!
No, there are lots of options.
Remain, supported by roughly half
No deal, supported by about 20%
May's deal, supported by about 10%
Unicorns, supported by half (I'll be generous - more than half).
The only problem is that unicorns still don't exist however pretty they are.
I'm not even sure it's really disenfranchising if the purpose is to not devastate a country. Is it disenfranchising if you stop a child from running with scissors?
Only option left is No deal and the majority of parliament are simply not going to let that happen so we end up revoking A50.
Oh god! Can you imagine Farage and all the gammons? Please god, let this happen? Just to see their faces!
Would the EU actually want us to stay after all the bother we've caused? I'd imagine we'd be on the naughty step for quite some time
And more importantly... what colour would our passports be then?
Not this old chesnut yet again, the UK has already enacted the legislation required by this directive – much of it yonks ago
It doesn't matter, the UK practises a light touch enforcement of corporate tax affairs, especially in relation to offshoring to British protectorate tax havens. In the UK it is worth the risk for corporations and very wealthy individuals to break tax laws under the pretence of "tax efficiency", under the new directorate they would be held accountable.
And personally I hope the likes of the channel islands, IoM, Gibraltar, Monaco etc become financial wastelands for the damage they have done to taxable revenues for decades.
I used the same analogy near enough with my kids this weekend.
We warn kids often enough that if they don't walk properly / keep climbing on things they'll fall off and hurt themselves. Then we let them do it anyway, because until they hurt themselves they don't believe us. It hurts and there are tears but the grazes on the knee* aren't that desperate and will heal.
We also tell them not to run into the road because they'll get run over. We don't let them find that out to prove the point.
I'm not one for nanny state politics but standing by as the bus flattens us saying 'see, I told you' doesn't seem that smart.
* Trump might be broken bones, but that too is temporary.
Are we to thus disenfranchise 17m voters?
Yes please. But it's necessary to explain why. Those who got us into this mess need to be held to account and face the consequences.
CougarFar as I can tell with Corbyn, he isn’t anti-EU (despite Binners’ protestations, whom I usually agree with), rather he thinks it’s broken and needs fixing.
Doesn't seem like it reading this (disclaimer: written by a lib dem)
https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/