Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For the first time since GE2017 consecutive polls have Corbyn’

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited December 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For the first time since GE2017 consecutive polls have Corbyn’s Labour behind

Two Westminster voting intention polls in the past 24 hours have both got the COM in the lead and of course LAB in second place. This is the first time since the general election that consecutive polls have showed this.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • tory mini surge klaxon
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 39,624
    edited December 2017
    Interesting the main Tory movement is to UKIP and 3% of Labour voters have moved to the LDs since June with yougov, with Tory to Labour and Labour to Tory movement equally matched and both parties also picking up a bit from June LD voters
  • As we know, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. It's pretty clear that around 40% of voters are never going to vote for a party led by him. If the Tories deliver a soft Brexit, the main reason for a lot of other voters to hold their noses and stick with Labour goes away.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 870
    I think the comment about Corbyn not wanting to talk about Brexit is true.

    I went to my first Corbyn rally over the summer (don't worry I didn't inhale any socialism) and in a 25 minute speech which was very polished as he'd done it so many times on the campaign trail, Brexit wasn't mentioned once. It was all anti-austerity.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,787
    LOL, with the greatest of respect to Mr Smithson, how can he call himself a political expert when he still thinks Brexit is "by far the biggest issue of the day"? Did he speak to any normal voters during the election? Brexit was about 4th or 5th at best in terms of the issues people cared about, especially after the first couple of weeks of the campaign.

    I still maintain a large part of the polls' non-movement is pretty normal for the post-election period (people are usually too stubborn to admit they got their vote wrong so soon afterwards), but to the extent that Labour aren't making the most of potential, I don't think it's anything to do with Brexit, and certainly nothing to do with the "Venezuela" bollocks. It's more with regards to economic issues I think - specifically, the lingering fear that people still have that, although Corbynomics is very desirable, it's not realistically achievable, at least not without "maxing out the credit card" or "crashing the economy".
  • As we know, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. It's pretty clear that around 40% of voters are never going to vote for a party led by him. If the Tories deliver a soft Brexit, the main reason for a lot of other voters to hold their noses and stick with Labour goes away.

    Also May will not (in all liklihood still) be in the running. Get someone fresh faced and new with new ideas against the 73 yr old and thats another factor.
  • FPT

    TGOHF said:

    twitter.com/ManfredWeber/status/940565300252233728

    Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
    What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
    Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
    They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
    No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,642
    Broadly agree Mike but I don't think a more pro-Remain stance would have done or would do Labour any favours. If Labour had taken a few (say, 2% national vote share) Remain die-hards from the Lib Dems and lost a few Labour Leavers to the Conservatives at GE2017, Theresa May would have got her majority.
  • Happy post-meridian work period, comrades.

    Do not believe this fake news. Prime Comrade Chairman Corbyn is the undoubted champion of the proletariat, and the tawdry trappings of capitalist democratic office cannot besmirch his glorious dungarees!
  • "Labour’s real problem is that it is failing to have a clear distinctive voice that resonates with the vast numbers of Labour voters who are strongly for remain."

    In your eyes, Mike. In reality if Labour jumped that way they would lose a chunk of Leave voters in seats like Don Valley.

    Facing both ways at once seems to be pretty sensible short-term tactics (and was the key reason they did so well in June). Of course, the Lib Dems' experience shows us the long-term perils of this approach.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,787
    edited December 2017

    As we know, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. It's pretty clear that around 40% of voters are never going to vote for a party led by him. If the Tories deliver a soft Brexit, the main reason for a lot of other voters to hold their noses and stick with Labour goes away.

    Also May will not (in all liklihood still) be in the running. Get someone fresh faced and new with new ideas against the 73 yr old and thats another factor.
    Which Tory other than May do you think would be able to win Mansfield?
  • Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810
    FPT (only done for the most important of issues)

    if it was legally binding youd be complaining
    if it wasn't legally binding youd be complaining

    why not give up remoaning for the festive season and share some goodwill
    I'm full of goodwill.

    I see The Last Jedi in less than 36 hours time, and the reviews are brilliant.
    Is it going to be The Empire Strikes Back... Again?

  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    tory mini surge klaxon

    Klaxonette

  • Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 12,463

    FPT

    TGOHF said:

    twitter.com/ManfredWeber/status/940565300252233728

    Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
    What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
    Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
    They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
    No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
    Which the EU will be extremely keen to make happen.

    *innocent face*
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,642

    "Labour’s real problem is that it is failing to have a clear distinctive voice that resonates with the vast numbers of Labour voters who are strongly for remain."

    In your eyes, Mike. In reality if Labour jumped that way they would lose a chunk of Leave voters in seats like Don Valley.

    Facing both ways at once seems to be pretty sensible short-term tactics (and was the key reason they did so well in June). Of course, the Lib Dems' experience shows us the long-term perils of this approach.

    Exactly, I'm no fan of Corbyn but I have to admit his ambivalence on this issue is something of a masterstroke. Leavers are a small minority in the PLP and membership but a much larger one among Labour voters. He's keeping them on board without alienating hardcore Remainers, some of whom, judging by my adventures on social media, genuinely believe he's going to stop Brexit.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    It hangs on whether the May government will actually be able to make any progress with her agenda of addressing the structural unfairness in our economy and society, or whether the rest of her term will simply be yet more drift and indecision.

    Technically we are not yet in midterm.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    What time does the Alabama polls close ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810
    edited December 2017

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Yes, quite enjoyable watching them crush the rebel scum. :p
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 715

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
  • RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%
  • Essexit said:

    "Labour’s real problem is that it is failing to have a clear distinctive voice that resonates with the vast numbers of Labour voters who are strongly for remain."

    In your eyes, Mike. In reality if Labour jumped that way they would lose a chunk of Leave voters in seats like Don Valley.

    Facing both ways at once seems to be pretty sensible short-term tactics (and was the key reason they did so well in June). Of course, the Lib Dems' experience shows us the long-term perils of this approach.

    Exactly, I'm no fan of Corbyn but I have to admit his ambivalence on this issue is something of a masterstroke. Leavers are a small minority in the PLP and membership but a much larger one among Labour voters. He's keeping them on board without alienating hardcore Remainers, some of whom, judging by my adventures on social media, genuinely believe he's going to stop Brexit.
    Like trump, a lot of people seem to pin their own views onto corbyn, no matter what the evidence to the contrary.
  • Having a clear voice on Brexit has not helped the Lib Dems increase their share of the vote at the general election or at rcent pollig on Westminster seats.

    So why would Labour benefit from taking a clear position?
  • Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    surbiton said:

    What time does the Alabama polls close ?

    7 pm UK local
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%
    Coincidence that I was on my way home at the time? I think not :p
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,639
    Essexit said:

    "Labour’s real problem is that it is failing to have a clear distinctive voice that resonates with the vast numbers of Labour voters who are strongly for remain."

    In your eyes, Mike. In reality if Labour jumped that way they would lose a chunk of Leave voters in seats like Don Valley.

    Facing both ways at once seems to be pretty sensible short-term tactics (and was the key reason they did so well in June). Of course, the Lib Dems' experience shows us the long-term perils of this approach.

    Exactly, I'm no fan of Corbyn but I have to admit his ambivalence on this issue is something of a masterstroke. Leavers are a small minority in the PLP and membership but a much larger one among Labour voters. He's keeping them on board without alienating hardcore Remainers, some of whom, judging by my adventures on social media, genuinely believe he's going to stop Brexit.
    Short term v long term.

    The LibDems under Kennedy were slated, at the time, for their stand against the Iraq war. Yet, in the medium term at least, it delivered them significant benefit, as well as having been the right thing to do.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,692
    RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    Looking at the subsamples of the last two Yougov polls , most of the change appears to be down to the Scotland data. In less than a week the Tories have gone from 23% to 37% with Labour dropping from 30% to 21% . SNP are at 34% compared with 38% last week.
    I suspect it has skewed the overall GB figures somewhat.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
  • RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    God no....that was the worst part about rogue one...especially when the actor they actually filmed looked just like him anyway.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810
    edited December 2017
    justin124 said:

    RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    Looking at the subsamples of the last two Yougov polls , most of the change appears to be down to the Scotland data. In less than a week the Tories have gone from 23% to 37% with Labour dropping from 30% to 21% . SNP are at 34% compared with 38% last week.
    I suspect it has skewed the overall GB figures somewhat.
    What do you mean? There’s no way that subsample data could be wrong.

    :innocent:
  • RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    I have issues about using Peter Cushing's image to play Grand Moff Tarkin without his consent.
  • RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%
    As I'm sure you know, it doesn't follow that YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of that. They don't just weight according to geography.
  • surbiton said:

    What time does the Alabama polls close ?

    When Moore has enough votes.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    I have issues about using Peter Cushing's image to play Grand Moff Tarkin without his consent.
    Welcome to the future. I hadn’t really thought too much about the ethics behind it to be honest.
  • Mr. D, Tarkin's an underrated villain. He and Vader were a great double act in A New Hope.

    #worsttakeyourdaughtertoworkdayever
  • RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%
    As I'm sure you know, it doesn't follow that YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of that. They don't just weight according to geography.
    I thought they did.

    The Tories led Labour by just 2 on the weighted sample (520 v 518) and of the total weighted sample of 1,680, the weighted Scottish sample was 146,
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    God no....that was the worst part about rogue one...especially when the actor they actually filmed looked just like him anyway.
    What can I say, I have a soft spot for the governor. ;)
  • RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    I have issues about using Peter Cushing's image to play Grand Moff Tarkin without his consent.
    They soughtvand obtained permission from his family which to my mind is absolutely fine.
  • midwintermidwinter Posts: 1,065
    Danny565 said:

    As we know, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. It's pretty clear that around 40% of voters are never going to vote for a party led by him. If the Tories deliver a soft Brexit, the main reason for a lot of other voters to hold their noses and stick with Labour goes away.

    Also May will not (in all liklihood still) be in the running. Get someone fresh faced and new with new ideas against the 73 yr old and thats another factor.
    Which Tory other than May do you think would be able to win Mansfield?
    A more charismatic Tory leader running a better campaign could have won far more of the leave leaning seats in the North and Midlands than May did. And not necessarily just from the Leave wing of the party. And without losing Canterbury, Reading , Battersea, Kensington and so on. Probably only against Corbyn though.
  • Whilst we're on villains, Snoke is a stupid name and the main villain in the new trilogy should be Grand Admiral Thrawn.

    I know we've discussed this before, but still.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,692

    RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%
    As I'm sure you know, it doesn't follow that YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of that. They don't just weight according to geography.
    An 11.5% swing from Labour to the Tories in Scotland in less than a week would be a bit surprising!
  • New Star Wars plot? Let me guess.....plucky female lead, droid, death star plans, finds rebels, deathstar has designed in weak point, battle, death star goes boom. End credits.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,365
    edited December 2017
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    I have issues about using Peter Cushing's image to play Grand Moff Tarkin without his consent.
    Welcome to the future. I hadn’t really thought too much about the ethics behind it to be honest.
    What is scary is that this kind of tech can now be performed on pretty much any individual (without their consent), by somebody who knows their tensorflow from their caffe.
  • RobD said:

    Mike, you're reading too much into these polls by the lead standard pollsters who were proved so wrong in June, when the Gold Standard has Labour 8% ahead.

    Plus the YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of a comedy Scottish subsample.

    :o what have I missed?
    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%
    As I'm sure you know, it doesn't follow that YouGov only has the Tories ahead because of that. They don't just weight according to geography.
    I thought they did.

    The Tories led Labour by just 2 on the weighted sample (520 v 518) and of the total weighted sample of 1,680, the weighted Scottish sample was 146,
    But they also weight according to age, social grade, gender, newspaper etc. (some of these weighted within regions iirc). They could easily have an older Scottish sample and a younger North sample here. i.e. one odd subsample usually has equal and opposite subsample(s) to counterbalance it.
  • RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    I have issues about using Peter Cushing's image to play Grand Moff Tarkin without his consent.
    Welcome to the future. I hadn’t really thought too much about the ethics behind it to be honest.
    The Guardian did, as did a few others

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/21/peter-cushing-rogue-one-resurrection-cgi

    My view at the time is it ok if the actor was already starring in the film, like Oliver Reed in Gladiator, or Philip Seymour Hoffman in Hunger Games series.

    At no time did Peter Cushing give his consent to star in Rogue One.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    Whilst we're on villains, Snoke is a stupid name and the main villain in the new trilogy should be Grand Admiral Thrawn.

    I know we've discussed this before, but still.

    That’s probably the worst part of the new films.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,787
    midwinter said:

    Danny565 said:

    As we know, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. It's pretty clear that around 40% of voters are never going to vote for a party led by him. If the Tories deliver a soft Brexit, the main reason for a lot of other voters to hold their noses and stick with Labour goes away.

    Also May will not (in all liklihood still) be in the running. Get someone fresh faced and new with new ideas against the 73 yr old and thats another factor.
    Which Tory other than May do you think would be able to win Mansfield?
    A more charismatic Tory leader running a better campaign could have won far more of the leave leaning seats in the North and Midlands than May did. And not necessarily just from the Leave wing of the party. And without losing Canterbury, Reading , Battersea, Kensington and so on. Probably only against Corbyn though.
    Such as who....?

    I'm almost certain Boris would've performed worse than May in the North, for example.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,248
    My local cinema are showing The Force Awakens at 9pm and The Last Jedi at midnight :smiley:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439

    RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    I have issues about using Peter Cushing's image to play Grand Moff Tarkin without his consent.
    They soughtvand obtained permission from his family which to my mind is absolutely fine.
    I didn't realise he had a family. If I'm right they must have been quite distant relatives.

    I remember that Laurence Olivier's image and some recorded vocal material was used for a film called Sky Captain about 15 years ago - however, that didn't involve anything new being created.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 64,256
    edited December 2017
    Scott_P said:

    My local cinema are showing The Force Awakens at 9pm and The Last Jedi at midnight :smiley:

    Is it a Cineworld?

    They screwed up, it is showing Wednesday night at 9pm.

    I has my tickets.
  • Just to repeat, no sodding spoilers...I am out of the country and won’t get to see it until Christmas Eve!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810
    Scott_P said:

    My local cinema are showing The Force Awakens at 9pm and The Last Jedi at midnight :smiley:

    Imagine they did that with A New Hope and the force awakens. You’d come out thinking you’d watched the same movie twice :p
  • Corbyn is drifting behind because he is being slowly found out on a host of issues, not just Brexit.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    Just to repeat, no sodding spoilers...I am out of the country and won’t get to see it until Christmas Eve!

    Have you watched Empire Strikes Back? :p
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,248
    RobD said:

    Imagine they did that with A New Hope and the force awakens. You’d come out thinking you’d watched the same movie twice :p

    When ROTJ came out, the big Odeon in Edinburgh did all 3 in one showing. It was epic
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439

    Corbyn is drifting behind because he is being slowly found out on a host of issues, not just Brexit.

    That's a dangerous argument. We all thought that before the election too. It didn't quite work out that way.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439
    RobD said:

    Just to repeat, no sodding spoilers...I am out of the country and won’t get to see it until Christmas Eve!

    Have you watched Empire Strikes Back? :p
    Worst spoilers ever. Once you've watched that, you know exactly what happens in Episode III.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 35,248

    Is it a Cineworld?

    They screwed up, it is showing Wednesday night at 9pm.

    I has my tickets.

    Picturehouse sold tickets for a midnight showing of TFA, until they realised they were not licensed and cancelled on the day
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,444

    Just to repeat, no sodding spoilers...I am out of the country and won’t get to see it until Christmas Eve!

    Spoiler - Luke training Leia in the ways of the force means the Uk is staying in the single market and customs union (hat-tip williamglenn)

  • Scott_P said:

    My local cinema are showing The Force Awakens at 9pm and The Last Jedi at midnight :smiley:

    A bit late for films aimed at 12-year-olds.
  • Mr. Eagles, as Davros explained in Genesis of the Daleks, you can't trust the people.

    .....
  • Scott_P said:

    It's a CHRISTMAS film...

    twitter.com/channel4/status/940200462090940416

    Perfect evening, a good Christmas movie and a take away pizza, Hawaiian of course.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 17,769
    FPT

    TGOHF said:

    twitter.com/ManfredWeber/status/940565300252233728

    Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
    What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
    Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
    They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
    No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
    I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,533
    FPT:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    I doubt he will be beheaded no matter how bad he is.

    An adulterer and divorcee as Supreme Governor of The Church of England, that way madness lies.
    Are you really in a position to criticise those failings?
    I'm not planning on being Supreme Governor of The Church of England in the next few years, or ever.

    It is a looming constitutional nightmare, plus I suspect a lot of people won't be he happy with Queen Camilla, which is another mess.
    Camilla's not going to be Queen.

    She will remain Duchess of Cornwall.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morganatic_marriage
    She can't. She holds that position as the wife of the Duke of Cornwall, which is a title that is always held by the eldest son of the monarch. When Charles becomes king, then he ceases to be Duke of Cornwall (and Rothsay, on the same basis), and, in consequence, she ceases to be Duchess.
    You need to think outside the box. After Charles becomes King, Camilla will divorce him and marry William. She will thus become Duchess of Cornwall again.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,354
    edited December 2017
    If we avoid, on the one hand full membership of the EU, and on the other hand no preferential relationship with the EU (WTO), we end up in the Norway/Canada space. The difference between the two is that Norway (EEA) is an agreement to participate in the EU's trading system with the benefits and obligations that comes from being part of a system, while Canada (FTA) is a treaty between two trading units with the rules specified in a very long document.

    In her Florence speech Theresa May indicated she wants the benefits of the more comprehensive and extensive Norway system, while being bound by the more limited obligations specified in a Canada style treaty. A form of having cake and eat, maybe,

    Article 50 phase 1 agreement referred to regulatory "alignment" between the UK and the EU in the context of the Good Friday Agreement (GFA). This was seen as a fudge. It cannot remain so. By the time we get a permanent trade deal the EU and the UK will agree a treaty which will set out the rules - either follow the system rules (Norway) or follow these specified rules (Canada). If the rules aren't specified one way or the other, we won't be bound to do anything different. It becomes clear only Norway can be regulatory "alignment" - when the EU rules change so do ours. With Canada they are fixed for all time. That's one reason Canada is necessarily more restricted than Norway.

    Regulatory alignment is a big issue for the EU, apart from the GFA. This suggests to me the EU will be pushing hard for us to have Norway style rule taking. It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    So we could say, in that case we want the benefits of Norway too. It's also easier to negotiate. The treaty essentially exists off the shelf as a forty page document, while a Canada style deal requires extensive and detailed negotiation. The Canada agreement runs to 1600 pages. We could say, we don't want any agreement, but I don't think that's a realistic outcome. One thing Mrs May has done for the Conservatives in the last week is to create the assumption of a deal. Mainstream Conservative MPs, who don't seem to enjoy talking about Brexit, breathed a big sigh of relief this week that it hasn't yet blown up in their faces.

    But if curtailing Freedom of Movement is the be-all-and-end-all, you could have limited Canada trade benefits with Norway style rule taking on trade, business and the environment and a concession on freedom of movement Would that ultimately be acceptable?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810

    FPT

    TGOHF said:

    twitter.com/ManfredWeber/status/940565300252233728

    Nothing is agreed until everything’s is agreed is the new despite / because of brexit
    What's the new 'we hold all the cards' or 'the German carmakers will make sure we get a good deal'?
    Seems like the German carmakers have delivered so far ..
    They've made the UK agree to terms that mean it can never leave the single market and customs union? Seems like a good deal for them...
    No they have not. If you're referring to the "regulatory alignment" passage that only applies in the absence of a trade deal.
    I'm afraid you haven't understood what has been agreed. The 'last resort' is now the default, unless and until there is a political solution for Northern Ireland.
    Isn't the default Brexit the no deal WTO rules Brexit? That's what happens if nothing is agreed.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 31,810
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    I doubt he will be beheaded no matter how bad he is.

    An adulterer and divorcee as Supreme Governor of The Church of England, that way madness lies.
    Are you really in a position to criticise those failings?
    I'm not planning on being Supreme Governor of The Church of England in the next few years, or ever.

    It is a looming constitutional nightmare, plus I suspect a lot of people won't be he happy with Queen Camilla, which is another mess.
    Camilla's not going to be Queen.

    She will remain Duchess of Cornwall.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morganatic_marriage
    She can't. She holds that position as the wife of the Duke of Cornwall, which is a title that is always held by the eldest son of the monarch. When Charles becomes king, then he ceases to be Duke of Cornwall (and Rothsay, on the same basis), and, in consequence, she ceases to be Duchess.
    You need to think outside the box. After Charles becomes King, Camilla will divorce him and marry William. She will thus become Duchess of Cornwall again.
    Then who will become Queen? :o
  • Hmm, I don't think we should over-analyse. Polls tend to bounce around a bit in response to whatever is grabbing the headlines. Theresa May has had a good week or so, after some very bad weeks, so it wouldn't be too surprising if there is a little boost for the Tories. Or it may just be statistical noise. The overall picture seems pretty stable, and I think is likely to remain so until the Brexit fogs clear, unless there is some big upset.
  • rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    I doubt he will be beheaded no matter how bad he is.

    An adulterer and divorcee as Supreme Governor of The Church of England, that way madness lies.
    Are you really in a position to criticise those failings?
    I'm not planning on being Supreme Governor of The Church of England in the next few years, or ever.

    It is a looming constitutional nightmare, plus I suspect a lot of people won't be he happy with Queen Camilla, which is another mess.
    Camilla's not going to be Queen.

    She will remain Duchess of Cornwall.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morganatic_marriage
    She can't. She holds that position as the wife of the Duke of Cornwall, which is a title that is always held by the eldest son of the monarch. When Charles becomes king, then he ceases to be Duke of Cornwall (and Rothsay, on the same basis), and, in consequence, she ceases to be Duchess.
    You need to think outside the box. After Charles becomes King, Camilla will divorce him and marry William. She will thus become Duchess of Cornwall again.
    Then does Harry get to marry Kate, rather than someone who reminds him of Kate?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 13,870
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    I doubt he will be beheaded no matter how bad he is.

    An adulterer and divorcee as Supreme Governor of The Church of England, that way madness lies.
    Are you really in a position to criticise those failings?
    I'm not planning on being Supreme Governor of The Church of England in the next few years, or ever.

    It is a looming constitutional nightmare, plus I suspect a lot of people won't be he happy with Queen Camilla, which is another mess.
    Camilla's not going to be Queen.

    She will remain Duchess of Cornwall.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morganatic_marriage
    She can't. She holds that position as the wife of the Duke of Cornwall, which is a title that is always held by the eldest son of the monarch. When Charles becomes king, then he ceases to be Duke of Cornwall (and Rothsay, on the same basis), and, in consequence, she ceases to be Duchess.
    You need to think outside the box. After Charles becomes King, Camilla will divorce him and marry William. She will thus become Duchess of Cornwall again.
    William becomes a bigamist?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 17,769
    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.
  • Facebook is to overhaul its tax structure so that it pays tax in the country where profits are earned, instead of using an Irish subsidiary.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42324485
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,416
    TGOHF said:
    Anyone would think the EU was like some tribe of the rain forest, where you present a pretty girl with a flower, only to find you are now married to her.....

  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,302

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,416

    Hmm, I don't think we should over-analyse. Polls tend to bounce around a bit in response to whatever is grabbing the headlines. Theresa May has had a good week or so, after some very bad weeks, so it wouldn't be too surprising if there is a little boost for the Tories. Or it may just be statistical noise. The overall picture seems pretty stable, and I think is likely to remain so until the Brexit fogs clear, unless there is some big upset.

    Or, maybe starting to sort out Brexit IS playing really well with the Scots? Maybe Sturgeon really DOES look a plonker, with her gritted-teeth welcoming of the progress in the Article 50 process. Maybe an English leader really DOES hurt Scottish Labour.

    (I know, I know, clutching at straws - but surely it has to wind up TSE!)
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,302

    TGOHF said:
    Anyone would think the EU was like some tribe of the rain forest, where you present a pretty girl with a flower, only to find you are now married to her.....


    Give a girl a flower to marry her? How strange. I thought it was that you had to marry if you deflower her...

  • RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Andrew said:

    Mr. D, to be fair, Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars film.

    Not particularly high praise, given they've all been junk since the first two :-)
    Yer what, ROTJ and Rogue One are fabulous.
    Rogue one was great. I enjoyed the fact Tarkin was resurrected via CGI.
    I have issues about using Peter Cushing's image to play Grand Moff Tarkin without his consent.
    Welcome to the future. I hadn’t really thought too much about the ethics behind it to be honest.
    The Guardian did, as did a few others

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/21/peter-cushing-rogue-one-resurrection-cgi

    My view at the time is it ok if the actor was already starring in the film, like Oliver Reed in Gladiator, or Philip Seymour Hoffman in Hunger Games series.

    At no time did Peter Cushing give his consent to star in Rogue One.
    His estate has gone.ovet all his works including use of his likeness as they see fit
  • Hmm, I don't think we should over-analyse. Polls tend to bounce around a bit in response to whatever is grabbing the headlines. Theresa May has had a good week or so, after some very bad weeks, so it wouldn't be too surprising if there is a little boost for the Tories. Or it may just be statistical noise. The overall picture seems pretty stable, and I think is likely to remain so until the Brexit fogs clear, unless there is some big upset.

    Or, maybe starting to sort out Brexit IS playing really well with the Scots? Maybe Sturgeon really DOES look a plonker, with her gritted-teeth welcoming of the progress in the Article 50 process. Maybe an English leader really DOES hurt Scottish Labour.

    (I know, I know, clutching at straws - but surely it has to wind up TSE!)
    He's not an English leader, he's a Yorkshire leader, that's electoral gold in Scotland and everywhere else.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,354

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,439

    TGOHF said:
    Anyone would think the EU was like some tribe of the rain forest, where you present a pretty girl with a flower, only to find you are now married to her.....


    Give a girl a flower to marry her? How strange. I thought it was that you had to marry if you deflower her...

    :lol:
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,129
    It's not Christmas - it's the Die Hard anniversary...
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,444
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
  • TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.

    It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,354
    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
    After we leave? Nope. Payments will be hard and fast treaty obligations for us, regardless of what we else agree after we leave. The EU can apply sanctions against us.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,129
    Essexit said:

    "Labour’s real problem is that it is failing to have a clear distinctive voice that resonates with the vast numbers of Labour voters who are strongly for remain."

    In your eyes, Mike. In reality if Labour jumped that way they would lose a chunk of Leave voters in seats like Don Valley.

    Facing both ways at once seems to be pretty sensible short-term tactics (and was the key reason they did so well in June). Of course, the Lib Dems' experience shows us the long-term perils of this approach.

    Exactly, I'm no fan of Corbyn but I have to admit his ambivalence on this issue is something of a masterstroke. Leavers are a small minority in the PLP and membership but a much larger one among Labour voters. He's keeping them on board without alienating hardcore Remainers, some of whom, judging by my adventures on social media, genuinely believe he's going to stop Brexit.
    That might have been tenable over an election campaign, but over a whole parliament (where you are also constantly critiquing the government's handling of Brexit) conspicuously having no policy of your own to offer as an alternative makes you look mendacious, incompetent, or both.
    Which doesn't make you seem any kind of improvement on the government you're trying to dislodge.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 17,769
    One thing the phase one agreement on Northern Ireland proves is that the EEA/EFTA Leavers were deluding themselves about their solution. This would not solve the basic problem of maintaining an open border, and as such the UK would never have been able to impose it in the face of the EU's negotiating position.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 3,746
    Afternoon all :)

    In lieu of repeating myself (which doesn't stop most people on here in all honesty), it's hardly surprising the avalanche (or blizzard if you prefer an alternative winter analogy) of triumphalist pro-May and pro-Government sentiment over the weekend has had an impact.

    Yes, we have a deal and to be honest a lot of it could have been concluded without the theatrics and the melodramatics but politicians are meant to be actors and entertainers so we shouldn't be surprised.

    The detail of the "Triumph" needs a bit more investigation and may chip away at the euphoria a little. We are still going to pay at least £40 billion and possibly a great deal more and will remain to all intents and purposes in the EU until April 2021.

    For those concerned about immigration, EU citizens will be able to bring spouses and extended family members to the UK and, I believe, the right of re-entry will exist as well. In addition, access to child benefit and other benefits will continue. The Irish border question has been kicked down the road like an empty can of Guinness with everybody re-assured by contradictory comments and aspirations.

    Is it better than walking away without a deal ? Possibly, possibly not, there's a long way to go. For pro-Government supporters stung by weeks of bad news, it's welcome short-term relief but much as Cameron's "flounce" achieved short-term popularity for little or no medium term benefit it remains to be seen how progress will translate into the harder questions.

    As for Labour, why do they have to take a firm position ? They aren't the Government. My take on Corbyn is, like most people, there are things he likes and is interested in and things he isn't and while I'm sure he has a view on the generality of the EU he may be less engaged in the specifics. That's why he has Starmer and his team and if I'm being honest I suspect there's very little in the agreement with which Starmer (or indeed any proponent of a "soft" Treaty) could argue.

    For those advocating not leaving and for those advocating walking away without a deal (vociferous minorities dealing in implausibilities in truth), it's a set back. The picture of our future relationship with the EU suggests more semi-detached than detached at this time which perversely may please no one but be the best outcome - that's often how it is in negotiations and compromises.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,210

    Hmm, I don't think we should over-analyse. Polls tend to bounce around a bit in response to whatever is grabbing the headlines. Theresa May has had a good week or so, after some very bad weeks, so it wouldn't be too surprising if there is a little boost for the Tories. Or it may just be statistical noise. The overall picture seems pretty stable, and I think is likely to remain so until the Brexit fogs clear, unless there is some big upset.

    I think (from the other side of the spectrum) that this is right. May quite reasonably has a modest bounce after concluding the agreement, after weeks of squabbling, especially as most of the media reported it in pretty favourable terms. I didn't believe in the 8-point Survation Labour lead and I think the true position is that people are largely still where they were 6 months ago, with Labour marginally up on then. Those of us in the thick of politics forget how little time has actually passed.

    Would Corbyn be doing better if he was championing one EU position? I don't think so - it would give one good story but unless it was at one extreme ("stay in at all costs" or "get out at all costs"), as events develop he'd need to keep adjusting it, just as the Government does. It's sensible to stay flexible and react as specific proposals evolve. I do agree that a more effective attack on the generally chaotic approach should be possible. His bias to issues over personalities may be getting in the way - he is simply unwilling to say, for instance, "Boris is useless" even if most people agree.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,444

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.

    It would be incredibly brave for the UK to walk off a cliff. If we do not get an agreement from here and refuse to make the payments we have signed up to that is exactly what will happen.

    Well quite - it's in both sides interest to get a mutually acceptable deal - it wont be some hard Brexit cliff nor some Friztl's cellar type arrangement as foretold by the doomster williamglenn.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,302
    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
    After we leave? Nope. Payments will be hard and fast treaty obligations for us, regardless of what we else agree after we leave. The EU can apply sanctions against us.

    If what you say is true, then it would be electoral suicide for TMay to sign up to that (once it was widely understood).

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 17,769

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
    After we leave? Nope. Payments will be hard and fast treaty obligations for us, regardless of what we else agree after we leave. The EU can apply sanctions against us.

    If what you say is true, then it would be electoral suicide for TMay to sign up to that (once it was widely understood).
    It will be a choice between signing up to that, or seeking to revoke Article 50. Brexit means Brexit.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,354
    edited December 2017

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
    After we leave? Nope. Payments will be hard and fast treaty obligations for us, regardless of what we else agree after we leave. The EU can apply sanctions against us.

    If what you say is true, then it would be electoral suicide for TMay to sign up to that (once it was widely understood).

    That's an important statement because it is exactly what TMay will sign us up to.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,444

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    It could be the opposite of what Mrs May wants - the greater obligations of Norway tied with the lesser benefits of Canada.

    This is now the negotiating trap that the government has fallen into, although the starting point is the full acquis, entailing obligations that go beyond the Norway option.

    Nothing's Agreed Until It's All Agreed.

    Not as I think you understand it.

    The Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement is a single agreement that is fixed next Autumn. The interim agreement that will probably be endorsed by the EU Council on Thursday is just that - an interim agreement. The actual agreement will contain the points from the interim agreement, adjusted and made into specific terms, an (assumed) "transition" arrangement for immediately after March 2019 for possibly two years, and on the same terms as EU membership and an (assumed) outline proposal for a long term relationship.

    The long term relationship will NOT be agreed when the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is made into treaty obligations, including exit fees etc.
    The Uk has secured staged payments - so it would be incredibly brave of the EU to fail to come to an agreement - unless of course they get the other countries to agree to up their budget contributions to fill the gaps.
    After we leave? Nope. Payments will be hard and fast treaty obligations for us, regardless of what we else agree after we leave. The EU can apply sanctions against us.

    If what you say is true, then it would be electoral suicide for TMay to sign up to that (once it was widely understood).

    Why would May sign a binding treaty with ridiculous terms like that - simply wont happen.

    If it's a two year transition then the payments will apply for two years.
This discussion has been closed.