Got to say I am enjoying reading Sarah Wollaston’s twitter feed.

Not being able to account for £350 million was a deliberate lie but not being able to account for 48 looks like incompetence as well

— dr Sarah Wollaston (@sarahwollaston) November 20, 2018

I enjoyed;

Right, I think have now got my head around Labour's Brexit policy… https://t.co/AJyxXUtZwe pic.twitter.com/iCbodBCNqS

— Matt Chorley (@MattChorley) November 19, 2018

Bottom line is Jezza wants a hard Brexit. You lot just don’t want too/won’t acknowledge this.

Binners, we acknowledge this, but what you don’t acknowledge is that the Labour party doesn’t do what Corbyn wants, it does what the party wants. Which might not be what its leader wants.

I really do not believe he does.  I am still awaiting some evidence of him saying so.

So why are May and co so desperate to stop the scottish court case going to the EU court?  Are they afraid that it will show brexit an be stopped?  They have lost in every court in the UK now.

Binners – Corbyn has repeatedly been saying stuff on brexit.  Its not a silence.  Its just not very dramatic compared to tory infighting thus gets little news coverage.  Its not what you want to hear but to insist he has been silent is utter rubbish – same as your claims he didn’t campaign is utter rubbish and he wants a hard brexit -is nonsense without any evidence to back it up.

Here is the text of his speech to the CBI:

Thank you Carolyn for that introduction. You became the Director-General of the CBI shortly before I became Leader of the Labour Party, and since that time Labour and the CBI have always had a very constructive and fruitful working relationship, which will no doubt continue in the future as we set a path for a more successful and prosperous society.

It is a pleasure to be here today, addressing you at such a crucial time in our country’s politics and national life. It’s a time of huge decisions that could shape our future for a generation or more: decisions about our relationship with the European Union, of course, but also about the kind of economy we want to have.

When I spoke to your conference last year I said that even though we were then seventeen months on from the referendum, the situation was more precarious than ever. Confusion at the heart of government was creating unprecedented uncertainty for business and workers across the country.

If I said the same today that would count as something of an understatement. Instead of national leadership, we have a Government in complete disarray. As soon as the terms of its Withdrawal Agreement from the EU were set down on paper, the Government began to collapse in on itself. And now the Conservative Party is trying to decide whether this crucial moment for our country is also the right time for a party leadership election.

That the Government has mishandled two years of negotiations is now hardly a controversial view, subjecting businesses and their workforces to months of uncertainty. Some perhaps hoped that the length of the negotiations might at least be a sign that the Government, rather than negotiating with itself more than with Brussels, was driving an effective and hard bargain to get the best deal for our economy.

Now we know the answer. After the events of the past week, many people and many businesses will be confused and anxious. The Prime Minister has negotiated a botched, worst-of-all-worlds deal which is bad for Britain, leaving the country in an indefinite halfway house without a real say.

The Withdrawal Agreement breaches Theresa May’s own red lines and doesn’t deliver the strong economic settlement the country needs to support jobs and industry. The deal makes no mention of retaining frictionless trade with Europe and offers only minimal protections for workers, consumers and our environment, while hard-wiring further potential restrictions on state aid for industry.

Labour has always said we respect the result of the referendum, but we cannot respect the shambolic way in which this Government has bungled these vital negotiations. This is after all a deal that was immediately denounced by the Brexit Secretary who was supposed to have negotiated it, as well as his predecessor. Labour will vote against the Government’s deal and if the Government cannot get its central policy through Parliament, then we will demand a General Election. But if we cannot secure a General Election, then we have been clear that all options must remain on the table, including a public vote.

Terry Sargent, the Chair and CEO of steel giant Thyssenkrupp in the UK – and a lifelong Conservative voter – recently said the Tories have “failed business”. They “aren’t making decisions for business” he said, “they are making decisions to prevent an implosion in their own party.”

The result of this skewed priority is a Brexit deal that is simply not good enough. Rather than ending the uncertainty of the last two-and-a-half years, the agreement the Government has negotiated locks in uncertainty for another two, three, four – who knows how many more years?

If a comprehensive future relationship is not agreed by January 2021, which few believe is likely after the experience so far, then those negotiations would have to be put on hold because the focus would inevitably shift from negotiating the future relationship to negotiating an extension to the transition period – meaning another period of further uncertainty.

And if the transition period can’t be extended, Britain will be locked into a backstop from which it cannot leave without the agreement of the EU, with no time limit or end point and no say for Britain, sowing the seeds of a backlash in years to come.

And that’s only the Withdrawal Agreement. The Outline Political Declaration that was also published last week, which is supposed to signal our future relationship with the EU after Brexit, runs to a mighty seven pages.

So after two whole years, the fruits of the Government’s efforts to outline our trading future can be set down on just seven sheets of paper – with no ambition to negotiate a new comprehensive customs union, no clear plan for a strong deal with the single market, merely a vague commitment to go beyond the baseline of the WTO, no determination to achieve frictionless trade or even the Prime Minister’s downgraded ambition for trade to be “as frictionless as possible” (meaning further uncertainty for business), and only the scantest mention of workers’ rights, consumer rights, or environmental protections.

After all the speculation about which adjective to use before the word Brexit — hard, soft, clean, red white and blue, the Prime Minister is trying to take us into a blindfold Brexit, a deal designed to get her through to the next stage of the process without anyone being able to see where we’re heading as a country. It’s a leap in the dark, an ill-defined deal with a never defined end date.

A blindfold Brexit, followed by further years of botched negotiations on our future relationship with the EU with most of our leverage already thrown away, risks seriously damaging British industry and the wider economy. The Government is trying to force through this bad deal by threatening us all with the chaos and serious damage to our economy of a no deal outcome.

But the Prime Minister knows that no deal isn’t a real option. Neither the cabinet nor Parliament would endorse such an extreme and frankly dangerous course.

Labour will not countenance a no deal Brexit. I fully understand why business, which knows how disastrous no deal would be, is so concerned at the prospect, and why some might feel under pressure to support any deal, no matter how botched and half-baked, to avoid a worse outcome.

But the threat simply isn’t realistic. If the Government believed no deal was a genuine option, it would have made serious preparations, but it hasn’t. Indeed, shortly before he quit, the former Brexit secretary revealed that he had only just found out that the UK is “particularly reliant on the Dover-Calais crossing” because we are, as he put it a “peculiar geographic entity” – by which I think he meant an island. Well, we’re only talking about 10,000 lorries a day arriving at Dover handling 17% of the country’s entire trade in goods, worth an estimated £122 billion last year.

The choice between Theresa May’s deal and no deal is a false choice, designed to scare people into backing the Government. So Labour has set out an alternative plan for a sensible jobs-first agreement that could win support in parliament and help bring our country together.

First, we want a new comprehensive and permanent customs union with a British say in future trade deals that would ensure no hard border in Northern Ireland and avoid the need for the government’s half-baked backstop deal. Businesses and workers need certainty. The Tories’ sticking plaster plan for a temporary customs arrangement, with no clarity on how long it will last and no British say, can only prolong the uncertainty and put jobs and prosperity at risk.

Second, a sensible deal must guarantee a strong single market relationship. Talk of settling for a downgraded Canada-style arrangement is an option popular only on the extremes of the Tory Party. It would be a risk to our economy, jobs and investment in our schools, hospitals and vital public services.

Third, a deal that works for Britain must also guarantee that our country doesn’t fall behind the EU in workers’ rights or protections for consumers and the environment. Britain should be a world leader in rights and standards. We won’t let this Conservative Government use Brexit as an excuse for a race to the bottom in protections, to rip up our rights at work or to expose our children to chlorinated chicken by running down our product standards.

A good Brexit plan for this country is not just about what can be negotiated with Brussels. It must also include a radical programme of investment and real change across our regions and nations. Brexit should be the catalyst to invest in our regions and infrastructure, bringing good jobs and real control to local communities and people.

If the Prime Minister is unable to negotiate an agreement that can win a majority in parliament and work for the whole country, Labour’s alternative plan can and must take its place.

The deal I have outlined has always been possible, putting the economy and jobs first, as both Labour and the CBI have argued in different ways for some time. In January, Carolyn called for the UK to remain in a customs union with the EU for the long term. And we agree with the CBI too on the need for a deal that guarantees a strong single market relationship. There is a better deal to be had and it’s not too late to achieve it – if the Prime Minister has the courage to change course, or stand aside and let Labour take the reins.

The responsibility for how we got to this point certainly lies in Downing Street, both with its current incumbent and her predecessor.

But there is a bigger story to tell. In 2016 the country voted to leave the EU against the economic backdrop of post-crash Britain: a million families using food banks, over 4 million children living in poverty and real wages that are lower today than they were in 2010.

In towns and cities hollowed out by industrial decline and neglect, with boarded up shops and closed youth centres, many people voted for Brexit as an act of protest against a political system that simply wasn’t delivering.

At the root of this was Britain’s profoundly unbalanced economy, chronic under-investment and failed economic policy. That needs to change.

The shape of our economy after Brexit will not only be determined by the text negotiated in Brussels. It will be driven by political decisions about the direction we wish to take as a country. We could try to carry on as before, with economic thinking that has fuelled instability, insecurity and crisis. Or we can embrace change and build a more equal and prosperous society that meets people’s hopes and needs.

So today I not only want to talk about getting a good deal with the EU but about getting a good deal for all our country’s people.

You may be working for a big company, struggling with increasing personal debt, striving to meet excessive rent or mortgage payments. You may be running a small business, scraping by week to week awaiting payments to come in to cover ever-rising overheads. You may be employed in the public sector having barely seen a pay rise in 10 years but working harder than ever as many of your colleagues have lost their jobs Or you may be surviving in the precarious economy as one in every nine working people now are, maybe getting paid the minimum wage on a zero-hours contract, instantly sackable, never knowing for sure whether you’ll have work from one day to the next.

When people such as these think about the economy – of course they’re asking what’s in it for me?

Household debt is rising, rents are rising, utility bills are rising, while the public services we rely on are shrinking in terms of what they can provide; social care, the NHS and children’s education.

Last week almost unnoticed amid the drama of cabinet resignations, Professor Philip Alston, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, published a damning report on poverty in the UK. He found that a fifth of the population, amounting to 14 million people, are living in poverty. He catalogued what he described as the “dramatic decline in the fortunes of the least well off” and said our rates of child poverty are “not just a disgrace, but a social calamity and an economic disaster.”

The fact is that wealth hasn’t trickled down. Instead, rigid and outdated economic thinking has helped create a situation where 20% of Britain’s wealth is in the hands of just 1% of the population making us one of the most unequal countries in the EU. Inflated boardroom bonuses haven’t made our economy stronger or more successful. Corporation tax cuts haven’t increased investment and growth or put more money in workers’ pay packets. And financial deregulation didn’t deliver self-regulating markets but an era-defining economic crash from which we are still struggling to recover.

It could not be clearer, business as usual isn’t working. And when the rules of the game aren’t working for the overwhelming majority, the rules of the game need to change.

That means a new settlement for business and a stronger say for the workforce where government will drive a higher rate of investment in infrastructure, education, skills and the technologies of the future. The largest businesses that can afford it will pay a bit more towards the common good.

So we will repeal the 2016 Trade Union Act and roll out sectoral collective bargaining to ensure that working people can be fairly represented through their trade unions. At the Labour Party Annual Conference in September we set out proposals to give workers a say, and a stake, in larger businesses. We will legislate to ensure a third of the seats on company boards are reserved for elected worker-directors. And we will give employees a stake in company profits by asking big businesses to transfer shares to be held by workers in trust.

Despite the frenzied reactions in certain sections of the press this certainly isn’t about any kind of war on business, rather the opposite. Labour recognises the vast and vital contribution businesses make to our economy and our society. And at the heart of that contribution are your employees. They have an interest in the long-term success of your company – their company. They have in-depth knowledge of its day to day workings. They have so much to contribute and giving them a real voice will strengthen, not weaken, the business. Workers create profits. Giving workers a share in them isn’t just fair, it’s good for business.

We believe our plans are necessary, not just to create a fairer economy that can command public legitimacy, but to rebuild our economy for the 21st century and raise productivity and investment in every region, nation and community. We share an understanding of the urgent need to increase public investment in the economy and if the public is going to invest on the scale needed then people need to feel they have a real say over their economic future.

The UK is the only major economy where investment is falling not rising. That is holding back our economy, innovation and productivity. The failure to invest means Britain’s productivity is 15% lower than that of other major economies.

So a future Labour government will develop a comprehensive Industrial Strategy to rebalance our economy, reduce our reliance on the financial sector centred in London and the South East and increase prosperity in every region and nation of the UK. We will follow the example of Germany and Canada in establishing a National Investment Bank and a network of Regional Development Banks. These will provide £250 billion of private lending capital to emerging businesses and co-operatives across the country, getting the money to where it’s needed and filling the gaps in lending left by private banks.

But as well as the lending gap we are also determined to close the skills gap. Labour will create a National Education Service to provide both vocational and academic training to anyone who wants it throughout their life. That is the best way to ensure people are equipped with the skills they need to flourish. Because education doesn’t just benefit the individual who receives it, it benefits the economy and society as a whole.

We recognise that to close the skills gap we cannot close ourselves off from the rest of the world. When the Tories talk about high skilled immigration, what they actually mean is high wage immigration. That won’t solve the shortages of nurses, care workers and builders we desperately need and vital to rebuilding an economy that works for all.

There is nothing to gain from false competition between good and bad migration which only whips up division and hatred. Having seen the consequences of this government’s hostile environment with the Windrush Scandal, few will be convinced that this government is capable of delivering either a fair or efficient migration system.

Britain’s infrastructure – its roads, its railways and its telecommunications desperately needs an upgrade. That is why Labour is also planning to create a National Transformation Fund. This will provide a further £250 billion, making sure we have the infrastructure we need to achieve our potential.

We’ve been talking a lot today about the urgency and importance of the choices we face over Brexit but in a very real sense the most serious and pressing challenge we face of all is the potential decimation of our planet. That’s why it’s our policy to aim for 60% of heat and electricity to come from low carbon or renewable sources by 2030 and to achieve net zero emissions before 2050.

The Conservative Government has overseen a 56% fall in investment in renewable energy over the last year. The next Labour Government will put our environment centre stage.

That doesn’t have to mean sacrifice, it’s a huge opportunity for businesses, jobs and communities. We will create 400,000 high-skilled, well-paid green jobs, cutting emissions and generating employment at the same time by increasing the production of offshore wind power sevenfold, doubling onshore wind power, trebling solar power and launching a £12.8 billion fund for home insulation.

These are bold plans but they are necessary if we are to meet the climate crisis head on and upgrade our economy for the 21st Century.

To tackle the greatest challenges facing our country today we shouldn’t fear change – we should embrace it. Deep-seated change is needed to avoid a damaging Brexit that will hurt enterprise, jobs and living standards, and instead use it as a catalyst for economic transformation.

Change is needed to prevent the destruction of our environment that endangers all of our futures. And change is needed to tackle the huge inequality that has distorted the economy and fractured our society.

A senior figure in public life recently warned that: “an economy in which the returns to capital are greater than the returns to labour is one in which support for capitalism is going to decline.”

This isn’t a quote from me or from John McDonnell. They are the words of the former Conservative Chancellor, George Osborne.

And he was absolutely right.

Business in Britain today faces a great future if it embraces the change we need for our economy and our society.

Labour is ready to lead that change and I invite you to join us to make that change together. To rebuild our economy and our country. So it really does work for the many, not the few.

There are also numerous other things from his speech to conference to numerous press releases and interviews.

I am still awaiting some evidence of him saying so.

So still ignoring how he has whipped the party at every vote so far. You have a religious zeal for blind faith, but his actions do not support his words.

Labour will not countenance a no deal Brexit

direct quote from Corbyn

MSP – come on – lets see your evidence.  Not a political act taken for political reasons ( If wrong IMO)but something from the man himself because ever public utterance says otherwise.  I don’t even mind something from 10 years ago before it was anything other than theoretical and he was without power or position.  Just one little quote

I do not have either blind faith or religious zeal.  I merely listen to what people say over and over again and tyake that to be their position.

Read his speeches.  Find me the quote.

That speech was all about delivering a Labour Brexit. Nothing about any options to stop Brexit. Nothing about dropping his red line on Freedom of Movement… what does “strong Single Market relationship” mean within doing that? Why would the EU allow a third county a “say” in its trade deals with the rest of the world? And what does that mean? Just a nod through? Or would we have own people at the EU still taking part in trade deal forming? And does that mean he is no longer suggesting that we would be able to have our own trade deals?

Oh I agree its all a bit daft – better than the tories but not by much.  Merely disproving his supposed silence adn merely showing he is opposed to a hard brexit unlike the claims above.

Also it clearly states a second referendum is one of the options they will pursue and that its a blueprint for a much softer brexit.  Starting from a very differnt position to the tories.

Having a red line on Freedom of Movement means Hard Brexit as a result. Outside the Single Market.

Hang on, I think you might have fallen for the media trick of suggesting that Hard Brexit means no deal, rather than meaning outside EEA.

Nope – I’m not the one falling for media / PR tricks here.  I prefer what people say to what their enemies claim they said.

Remember corbyns party is split wide open on brexit  only by fudging and taking a median line can he hold them together.  The divisions in Labour are going to be exposed as well.

MSP – come on – lets see your evidence

So political speeches are evidence, but political actions and voting record should be ignored? Do you even realise how desperately you are trying to twist perception.

His speeches are about as fanciful as tory speeches proclaiming NI border solutions. If a man’s actions do not match his words, then I judge him by his actions, you are obviously more easily lead.

The house of lords has been a more effective opposition to Brexit FFS.

Corbyn went on holiday during the referendum campaign after refusing to attend the official Remain campaign launch. Not sure asking for Article 50 to be triggered the morning after the referendum result was the best idea either. His own brother has stated that Jezza is opposed to EU membership.

Jeepers you guys are so desparate to twist everything to condemn him its funny.

Pointless debating this with folk who believe without evidence.  good political reasons for the vote to trigger a50 but you waon’t want to hear them No one has yet come up with the slightest thing showing Corbyn wants to crash out with no deal or even have a “hard brexit”  Every word he has said shows the opposite.  If he really wanted a hard brexit you could show some speech he had made at some point that says this – the fact is every speech he has made shows the opposite.

He refused to stand with the tories in the official remain launch – quite right.  He knows they are the enemy.

it clearly states a second referendum is one of the options they will pursue

Actually he clearly ruled out pursuing a second ref if he gets his dream of a general election and labour brexit.

Which isn’t good enough for me to vote labour.

Pointless debating this with folk who believe without evidence.

It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

I agree with tj that corbyn clearly claims that he wants a much closer relationship with the EU than the present govt is aiming for. However, given his cakeist claims and his own red line on FoM it does not seem at all clear to me that he wouldn’t end up in much the same place. No FoM, no SM. Simples.

Can someone tell me which constituency Rees Mogg represents? Just so I can avoid it, and the people that live there who somehow delivered enough votes to put him in Parliament. It must be a horrific place

Mogg is MP for North-East Somerset, so looks like you’ll be avoiding Bath for a while.

Mogg is MP for North-East Somerset, so looks like you’ll be avoiding Bath for a while.

I’d been led to believe he was the member for the 18th century by some areas of the press.

Uncle Jezza. Many people have repeated this but… ahem…

1) Thirty years of ranting about, and voting against, the EU as a ‘Capitalist Conspiracy’

2) Going totally AWOL during the referendum campaign

3) Calling a press conference the minute the result was declared demanding Article 50 be triggered immediately

4) Whipping his MPs to vote through activating article 50 (broke my irony filter, that one!)

5) Whipping his MPs to vote against remaining in the single market  (broke my irony filter that I’d only just had fixed)

6) Whipping his MPs to vote against remaining in the customs union  (irony filter gone again)

7) 2 years of complete inactivity, sat idley watching, including using PMQ’s used for asking the pressing questions of the day about bus timetables while avoiding brexit completely

8) Ignoring both his MP’s and his fabled ‘membership’ because thats what he does when the don’t agree with him. Democracy, my arse!

9) The interview last week where he once again says that he’s not going to support a second referendum ‘… AND IF THERE WAS ONE, I DON’T KNOW HOW I’D VOTE’

I can see your confusion. Its all pretty ambiguous stuff

He’s a Brexiteer. Deal with it.

The RH member for the 18th century suits the piece of excrement in my view 🙂

Anyway – hopefully he is enjoying this headline: https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-setback-proof-erg-emperor-jacob-rees-mogg-has-no-clothes-11558745

Mogg is now reduced to arguing that the tories don’t want May to lead them into next GE so they need to move now because he can’t get his 48 letters… What a ****.

Rees Mogg is my Aunts MP.  she thinks the sun shines out of his fundament and wants him as PM as does my cousin!

So to move on:

May loses the attempt to stop the EU court hearing the case whether or not the UK can unilaterally rescind A50.  Lost in court, lost on appeal in Scotland and now lost in the UK supreme court.  Why are they fighting this so hard?  Afraid they will lose in the EU court?  Afraid of another lie being exposed?

Also Scots tory MPS – won seats in part on their appeal to coastal communities over fishing rights being brought back to Holyrood.  Its now pretty clear that they will remain with the EU – thats one of the quid pro quo for May getting such a good exit deal.  Even if they only remain in the EU ( the fishing rights) during transition they will still be retained by Westminster.  Will the scottish tories vote against Mays deal as to accept it means breaking promises made that won them votes?  If they do so they will loose all these seats again.

Also on the scottish tories – they stood up and said the union must not be threatened by the deal.  Now Raab and other ex ministers state that the deal does threaten the union – after all if NI gets special status why not Scotland?
Mundell said he would resign – will he?

Although to some extent this is a sideshow and I doubt the scots tories will vote against the deal accepting it is seriously dangerous to their political careers as they would have broken two major pledges which won them a lot of votes.  I realy think if they don’t get control of fishing rights under scottish control they will lose most if not all of those seats.

Its going to be interesting which way they jump and what Davidson will say.

He’s a Brexiteer. Deal with it.

The sort of thing a Brexiter would say.  You are a Brexiter, no good trying to hide it and claim you are not as I know you are.  Last word on the matter.

Curses! Rumbled!

Mogg is MP for North-East Somerset, so looks like you’ll be avoiding Bath for a while.

Bath itself is, mostly, safe and currently Lib Dem. Although it is surrounded by his constituents.

Is it at all possible that Corbyn is right on brexit? I’ve asked myself this many times and don’t have an answer. The rabidly anti-brexit side of me who thinks anyone who voted for it is a ignorant imbecile thinks he’s got it terribly wrong and will pay for it by eventually alienating his young supporters and drifting back into mediocre obscurity. The other half however wonders if he touching on something that could propel him to power.

He’s one of the few politicians who recognises brexit for what it is, which is a protest vote against the status quo and a desperate attempt at some form of fundamental change. No one else, be that May, Blair, Chukka Umunna, Vince Cable, George Osborne or any of the other centrist status quo supporters are offering to solve the problems which created brexit, they just offer the same tired ‘like it or lump it’ message to the people who are so pissed off.

Maybe Corbyn and McDonnell are way ahead of everyone else? There not much in that speech above to dislike or disagree with if you come from any sort of left-leaning or progressive outlook. It seems to me that he’s the only politician acknowledging that we can’t go on as before as otherwise we’ll end up in a much worse position down the line.

France set to remove Carlos Ghosn from Renault after arrest

On Monday, Japanese prosecutors said Mr Ghosn had under-reported his income from running Nissan by 5bn yen ($44.4m; £34.5m) over five years.

Mr Ghosn is also chairman of both Nissan and Mitsubishi Motors and leads an alliance of the three carmakers.

No wonder this crook keeps threatening Brexit for his own gain.

What goes around come around … 😀

Chewkw you is still funny…..

Realistically, here’s what happens.

the “deal” is terrible. It satisfies neither camp of remainers or leavers.

labour, snp, Lib Dem’s etc can safely vote it down in Parliament knowing they won’t be “the enemy of the people” given how unpopular the deal is to the leavers

then it’s cap in hand to the eu to call the whole thing off while we sort ourselves out politically. GE most likely, Tories out, labour in, we forget about the whole thing and life goes back to normal.

brexit simply can’t happen now without destroying the UK, both financially and in terms of the Union.

brexit simply can’t happen now without destroying the UK, both financially and in terms of the Union.

I see no problem in that even if it means total destruction of the finance and even the Union.

Sometimes it is better to start again as the the entire system is knackered …

Destroy and create … just like the universe.

Chewkw you is still funny…..

Yes, that bloke is a corporate crook.  A crook. I mean how much does he earn and yet he wanted more !!!  What a despicable being …

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KweWIGr9NA

chewkw you is still unable to recognise irony

Plotters be plottin’

I see no problem in that even if it means total destruction of the finance and even the Union.

Sadly this is the view of many. It may be better long term but in the short term (20-30 years) the UK is fecked. Minor adjustments to a national economy take 10-15 years to shake out this is extreme

https://twitter.com/WritersFrock/status/1064600922528075777?s=19

 The other half however wonders if he touching on something that could propel him to power.

Let the country be destroyed and then re-build it as a socialist utopia fantasy. This has happened only once before and the country was a mess, talk about learning the wrong lessons from history.

The disaster capitalists will win this one.