Re: Brexit
 

We won't have when we leave if you believe brexit economics guru Patrick Minford...

Re: Brexit
 

And yet compared to a larger sample size in the form of Euro Elections. BP flattened the Liberal Anti-Democrats, only last week.

Re: Brexit
 

The thing very much to take from that poll and many others Dave is it just tells you how deeply divided this country is..

Re: Brexit
 

Doesn’t necessarily translate into a vote at a general election. UKIP for example never turned a good performance at the EP elections into anything at Westminster. Unless of course the public radically changed their minds between two dates a short timeframe apart... but we know that can’t happen ;)

Re: Brexit
 

So you're not a fan of polls again? You were getting quite enthusiastic about them ;)

Re: Brexit
 

With our unrepresentative electoral system, these percentages would not translate into significant numbers of seats for either Lib Dems or Brexit Ltd. One area where I can agree with their CEO.

Re: Brexit
 

I think also if people are voting in a general election, they want to vote for a party with more than one policy and the Brexit Party can't deliver here.

Re: Brexit
 

I did notice their QT representative was fudging this point, oddly using some of the ChangeUK methodology to not answer. No doubt waiting for her Leader to work out what policies might get past the electorate, to get enough Westminster seats to do what he really wants.

Re: Brexit
 

They didn't need to have more than one policy for the EU election.

Nigel Farage has already stated that the Brexit Party will determine what policies they will run with at a General Election.

Despite what some are wishing for, that is not something that is likely to happen soon if we get a new PM in place who gets us out of this EU incarceration. If that happens, the Brexit Party no longer has a raison d'etre.

Re: Brexit
 

I think the perception is that they will probably be quite right-wing, yet their MEPs number more Communists that Jeremy Corbyn has broken bread with.

Re: Brexit
 

The Brexit Party is not UKIP. Just because a politician or a whole party advocates Brexit does not mean they are right wing.

You forget that a large proportion of Labour voters wanted Brexit.

Far too many assumptions are being made on here.

Re: Brexit
 

Obviously they only needed one policy in place for the European elections but they need a full suite of policies if they are to contest a general election.

Who knows when that will be, hence they need to move forward on this. The corporate structure should help them move more swiftly than a traditional party.

I forget nothing Old Boy and my point was about how the diversity of views in the Brexit Party can come together with a general election manifesto. In terms of where they might go, think populism. So think high spending, low tax, low immigration, vocal support for our boys, etc. Let's see.

Re: Brexit
 

It's one poll. Don't get too excited. It is a sign that the Liberal Democrats are back and that the Brexit Party could well be a force too.

Now again it's one poll and also that if it were to be reflected in a General Election the shift would be so dramatic it's almost impossible to accurately forecast the individual seats (good luck Exit pollsters). However the estimated forecast from this voter share would have Labour and Conservatives as the largest and second largest parties respectively. Depending on the way the seats fell the Liberals or the Brexit party would be the junior party in any coalition.

Brings up the interesting prospects of the Lib Dems and Brexit Party joining forces to get a proportional system in place. Or more likely Labour and Tories joining forces to make sure it never, ever, happens.

---------- Post added at 09:01 ---------- Previous post was at 08:58 ----------

This would be a problem for the Brexit Party keep their coalition together, especially post-Brexit, as Brexit is the unifying policy. Underneath they all have very different ideas. You have Thatcherites joining forces with former Marxists. People who served in the British Army to people who supported the IRA. :spin:

Re: Brexit
 

Sky News makes a good point
https://news.sky.com/story/lib-dems-...-ever-11731962

The point about the wide range of views in the Brexit Party was the one I was trying to make to Old Boy - how do you mesh together a manifesto from such different bedfellows?

Re: Brexit
 

You can apply that sentiment to many politicians Mr K as what the eyes don't like they don't see and what the eyes do like they do see.;)

Re: Brexit
 

Turns out the You Gov poll did not have Brexit Party as an option in the poll question, it was hidden in “other”, this changes things dramatically.. To not have a party that came first in EU parliament Elections, as a poll option, is unacceptable. YouGov have some explaining to do.

---------- Post added at 10:33 ---------- Previous post was at 10:16 ----------

Did my post say anything about liking polls ever?

I tend to accept polls where they’re the official ones with a much larger sample size, you know the one that runs in to millions of votes, cast at a ballot box. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

There are good reasons for keeping minor and new parties in the “other” column. It can distort the results of the poll and make it harder to track genuine change in voter sentiment. It’s unlikely Yougov was looking for controversy (depending on who actually commissioned it, they may have had some input into the way questions were asked also).

There were several early EU election polls that didn’t specify the Brexit party, and where they polled highly it was because respondents named them unprompted. With a very new party that’s probably a better guide as to how well they’re likely to do with the electorate at large. Recognition is important.

Re: Brexit
 

YouGov have said they'll explain their methodology latter today. But YouGov's business depends on them being accurate and not conspiring against the Brexit Party so the psephologists would have made their decisions based on trying to get the most accurate result.

Also, it's one poll, let's calm down a bit.

Re: Brexit
 

Do the Brexit Party have 650 odd candidates who will stand up to the scrutiny of a General Election?

Re: Brexit
 

Does Change UK who are just as old as Brexit Party?

Re: Brexit
 

Don't know, but there's plenty of pensioners around with nothing better to do but screw it up for future generations, whilst happily bleeding the country dry themselves!

Re: Brexit
 

No, but nobody considers them a credible anyway! Labour, the Conservatives, the LDs do, plus the nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales in their own area.

Re: Brexit
 

Just remember it was a lot of the now pensioners which voted to take us into the ECONOMIC community in the first place. The difference is that we can see the way the POLITICAL union is taking us and we don't like it.

Re: Brexit
 

The 1975 referendum wasn't a vote to take us in. It was a vote to remain in. We joined in 1973.

Re: Brexit
 

I wonder who will select the candidates, as they don't have members with a vote on things like that?

Re: Brexit
 

I guess the same as selected their Peterborough candidate?

Re: Brexit
 

Putin?

Re: Brexit
 

Not this bullshit again - Know plenty of young people who voted for Brexit Party.

Enough of the prejudices of older voters who have just as much right to vote for who they please and if I am not mistaken, saw plenty of old people marching for a peoples vote so pack it in with the insulting and stereotyping of specific age groups, more specifically, old people. :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 14:29 ---------- Previous post was at 14:28 ----------

Now you are just being frankly, very silly.

Re: Brexit
 

Anyone can apply to be a BP candidate (if you pay £100), but I can't find anything about the selection process on the BP website.

Re: Brexit
 

Change UK who selects theirs - being one sided again, aren't we Hugh? :dozey: :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

I think it is equally relevant that ChangeUK/The Independent Group/whatever their latest name is should also publish how they select candidates, but my answer was in response to a question about the Brexit candidates in the (potentially) upcoming General Election.

Re: Brexit
 

Mick, why all the whatabouterry? No one needs to mention Clinton when discussing trump or Change UK when discussing the Brexit Party.

Re: Brexit
 

I cannot avoid answering a question, when one was not directed at me.

---------- Post added at 14:44 ---------- Previous post was at 14:39 ----------

Oh I know you'd just like to focus one aspect of this discussion to just the above, but we are not doing that.

When questions are being asked, why certain members picking on just Brexit Party ?

Because it's always one sided with some of you lot. When I mention issues that are across a whole spectrum on either side, it's "tumbleweed", but when it's Trump or Brexit Party, you jump right on it like bees to honey. It's pathetic.

Re: Brexit
 

You answered #3125 by trying to deflect attention to another party that's on its last legs.

At the moment, we're debating the Brexit Party not Change UK. You don't need to defend every organisation or politician like it's your football team. I don't mind discussing other parties if relevant but it doesn't progress the debate if it's just used as a distraction technique.

Re: Brexit
 

I don't know why you are trying to stir up hatred of the older generation, Mr K.

If the older and wiser people are telling you something that you don't agree with, maybe you should think on. No good complaining after the event.

---------- Post added at 15:13 ---------- Previous post was at 15:10 ----------

It's called balance, Andrew.

Re: Brexit
 

Does any party?
Just look at the idiots/clowns/incompetents that we currently have :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

Here is YouGov's reasoning for the decision to put them in other: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics...-why-its-more-

How pollsters ask questions is an eternally controversial issue. For voting intention, that often focuses upon how the answer options are presented. The approach that YouGov has always taken is to prompt for the traditional main parties, but only prompt for other parties if people select "other". A similar approach is taken by most other polling companies.

This may seem unfair to some people (and has often been a source of complaint from supporters of smaller parties), but is based on what actually gets elections right. In the past, prompting for smaller parties has tended to overstate their support when compared to actual elections, and the two-stage approach to prompting has produced more accurate results.

Re: Brexit
 

If you're really interested, the Lord Ashcroft Polling Group publish their data sets including demographics. The mean age of those surveyed was 53.29. Here are the mean ages for each group who voted in the EU elections;

Con - 55.45
Lab - 46.21
LD - 53.58
UKIP - 51.48
Brex - 58.76
ChUK - 51
SNP - 50.76
PC - 51.12
GRN - 47.65

Bear in mind that the standard deviation is around 15 so that's the size pinch of salt needing to be taken here.

Here's the data - https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-con...ay-2019-2.xlsx

Re: Brexit
 

Age doesn't equate to wisdom. I see plenty of racist, old and unenlightened bigots about. Maybe just as there's a minimum age to vote there should be a maximum? Those closest to death, statistically, have the least to lose from their foolish decision making.

Re: Brexit
 

What you see here folks, is a massive slur on the people that once worked hard to give you what is now being stolen by the EU

shame . .

Re: Brexit
 

It's not really a massive slur - Old Boy tried to equate age with wisdom - which is incorrect. I regularly encounter situations where people continually, to this day, use outdated 1980s terminology to describe corner shops and Chinese take-aways.

Also, given the huge structural deficit in this country, I'm not sure it can be said that the previous generations worked hard and paid their fair share at all. More like they mortgaged off the state assets through privatisation to enjoy a low tax economy and left future generations paying the debt. However, that's an argument for another thread...

Re: Brexit
 

The baby boomer generation, worked hard? :D Early retirement, free buses & TV licences ,generous pensions .... However they are making sure no one in the future gets that !

Re: Brexit
 

Wisdom as nothing to do with age as its more a case of people having the ability to garner great wisdom as some are far better then others at gaining great knowledge of the world then others.

Re: Brexit
 

Nobody can prove otherwise ;)

Although I agree, I think he'd be far too busy elsewhere extending Russian influence around the globe than deciding who should stand for the party in Bridgwater and West Somerset.

Re: Brexit
 

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

How about you demonstrate you have proof of Putin funding the BP. (Very pathetic claim btw and desperate).

Re: Brexit
 

I think most people would accept I was trying to inject humour into a thread that often lacks it. The notion of Putin personally sitting in the Kremlin with a dossier of candidates vetting them is rather unlikely.

Who funds the Brexit Party is an important question but it's much more likely to be secretive corporate financial interests (nothing new) than the Russian state itself. Conservatives have their donors, Labour have their unions, everyone is buying influence in politics that's the poisonous underbelly of capitalism. As Neil Diamond says "money talks".

Re: Brexit
 

They earned their way, the young need to do the same and not expect freebies for doing Sweet FA.

But as for this ageism crap that you are displaying, Mr K, today you have posted absolute dire and ridiculous claims all day - go back to bed and get out the right side. Jeez. :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 17:06 ---------- Previous post was at 17:04 ----------

The voters talked and they voted to leave (more than once).

Re: Brexit
 

But we can't ask them directly again.

Re: Brexit
 

We don't need to, we gave them our answer.

Re: Brexit
 

I'll accept we don't need to, in the sense that it's not mandatory. It will however be politically expedient to do so. Just as crashing out on March 29th wasn't politically expedient.

Re: Brexit
 

You've not read the relevant posts properly if that's your conclusion.

Re: Brexit
 

I really wouldn't try humour in CF, it's not understood or wanted ;)

Re: Brexit
 

That puts paid to practically all of your posts, then, old chap!:D

---------- Post added at 18:09 ---------- Previous post was at 18:00 ----------

Oh, yes I have. Everything needs to be seen in context, even when it discredits your own arguments.

Re: Brexit
 

lol, it doesn't come across that way as the relevant posts in question don't discredit my arguments.

---------- Post added at 18:18 ---------- Previous post was at 18:14 ----------

People have discussed chlorinated chicken on this thread before in the context of a free trade deal with the US. If anyone's interested, there's a Channel 4 Dispatches programme on the subject on Monday at 8pm.

Re: Brexit
 

I apologise, Andrew, you were right and I was wrong. With all these posts in quick succession and limitations on my time, I was confusing arguments.

:sorry:

Re: Brexit
 

---------- Post added at 19:17 ---------- Previous post was at 19:16 ----------

:tu:

Re: Brexit
 

Something to look forward to post Brexit.....

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...y_to_clipboard

Re: Brexit
 

Doesn't mean they are insisting on it being part of any agreement.

Re: Brexit
 

You shouldn't read too much into that. There are no plans to de-nationalise the health service!

Re: Brexit
 

Can you really see the NHS surviving the onslaught of Trade Deals with the US?

Re: Brexit
 

:confused: What are you going on about?


A lot is outside the NHS already, eg GP surgeries and associated services(eg physiotherapy).

Re: Brexit
 

Really? GPs may be independent contractors, but they are still part of the NHS - that's like saying because hospitals are Independent Trusts, they aren't part of the NHS.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/gp/
https://www.england.nhs.uk/2019/05/t...cross-england/

Re: Brexit
 

GPs have always been slightly outside NHS control.

What I fear is the NHS sold off piecemeal until nothing is left, then a US style insurance based system imposed. Brexit, leaves us in a weak negotiating position and the US will be circling like sharks to kill off the NHS even sooner.

Re: Brexit
 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...nhs-pay-drugs/

Re: Brexit
 

Whereas staying in the EU:

Re: Brexit
 

Utter nonsense.



Why would the US need a trade agreement for those matters. A US firm can(and do) set up a company in this country and supply goods/services in the same way as anybody else can. No trade agreement required.


The nearest thing to something needing a trade agreement is providing medical supplies, which are currently supplied from outside the NHS anyway. Anything else would require a physical presence in the UK.

Re: Brexit
 

That's a 2016 article concerning the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership which was canned so not a live prospect, unlike the US-UK one.

---------- Post added at 13:37 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------

The larger negotiating power (eg EU, US) has more negotiating strength. So it will bring in other things into the deal to help its own economy. We've already seen the NHS one, another suggestion from that country to include in a trade deal is for the UK not to deal with Huawei.

Re: Brexit
 

If the EU were considering it, they could still consider it within the EU.


Just because one side is claimed to have more power, doesn't mean it will flex that supposed power. A trade agreement is about mutual benefits overall.

The core NHS concept is "free at the point of use". Doesn't matter who provides it.

The price paid for drugs is not something that is subject to a trade agreement.

Re: Brexit
 

Article was updated on May 6th this year so it still looks Kosher.

Re: Brexit
 

If one of the parties stipulates it as a condition for a trade agreement it will be.

If a trade negotiator does not maximise their country's negotiating position, their boss will find someone who does.

It does. Outsourcing could result in increased costs and lack of knowledge transfer. But, I think we're moving off the Brexit debate somewhat.

---------- Post added at 14:22 ---------- Previous post was at 14:20 ----------

Not sure what you mean by that but the deal has been canned.

Re: Brexit
 

Luckily the Lisbon Treaty requires unanimity from the EU Council for any trade deals which include services; direct foreign investments; audiovisual and cultural services; social, educational and health services; and intellectual property. So that would be knocked back pretty quick by any country that has critical services, including the UK.

You would have thought that Louise Bours who is quoted in that article and has been an MEP since 2014 would know that.

Re: Brexit
 

She's ranked as the worst MEP so her ignorance does not surprise me!
https://theovertake.com/~meps/meps-t...and-the-worst/

Re: Brexit
 

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-...p/index_en.htm

Re: Brexit
 

Well found.
Yet another reason why people need to become less dependent on the Express for their supply of Brexit knowledge.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

If you want proportional representation, the Lib Dems are your best bet then. If you want the existing duopoly the Labour or Conservative parties will serve you well.

Re: Brexit
 

I think it was mentioned that these two systems were mutually incompatible in 2016. BTW, I am not sure that the technique of "heaping shame on anyone who tries to weasel-word" is that effective.

You should take a leaf of Femi's book: he turns up, talks to Leave supporters and tries to engage in courteous and rational debate.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

Then the UK should have elected a government who would deliver your wishes in 2017. Unfortunately for you we didn't.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

An update on an article does not necessarily mean new information has been included.
https://fullfact.org/europe/does-tti...atisation-nhs/

---------- Post added at 19:38 ---------- Previous post was at 19:36 ----------

They did their best, unfortunately they did not agree what that was, and still have not agreed.

Oh and in our adversarial democracy, the oppositions job is to scrutinise and check, not automatically agree with whoever formed the government.

Re: Brexit
 

And has been explained many times, that is not how the U.K. Parliamentary Democracy works - we are a representative democracy, not a delegated one.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

I wonder if the EU ever considered sending mailshots to all UK residents to put forward their point of view to try and garner support from the public, which in turn they would hope influenced the politicians?

Maybe there is a law preventing this or it would be viewed as bad protocol.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

It’s not an "explanation" - it’s a fact.

Britain is a Representative Democracy, not a Direct (delegate) Democracy - just repeating the same falsehood repeatedly doesn’t make it true.

It states so in Hansard.

https://www.parliament.uk/about/livi...ns/reformacts/ Margate Thatcher stressed this in her 1984 speech to the Carlton Club.

https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/105799 You may prefer Direct Democracy, but that’s now how it’s done in the U.K.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

It would be viewed as bad protocol and stand a chance of a backlash at being told what to do by the EU. They tried to keep out of the referendum for fear of making matters worse.

Re: Brexit
 

And? Just means they can sell American manufactured crutches, wheelchairs, ecg monitors etc.

All the panic mongers can calm down.

---------- Post added at 22:07 ---------- Previous post was at 22:02 ----------

And has been explained many times before, Parliament delegated that question to the people, and then voted to enact the result.

So on that particular question and action that is exactly how Parliament should have worked.

---------- Post added at 22:10 ---------- Previous post was at 22:07 ----------

It’s how that particular question was done. If parliament didn’t want to delegate authority to the public via the referendum then they should have voted against it.

Re: Brexit
 

Parliament cannot bind itself or its successors because the ultimate exercise of power in our system is an Act of Parliament which Parliament itself can both make and repeal (or amend).

It simply isn’t possible to oblige Parliament to do anything, because Parliament can repeal any Act that attempts to do so. A referendum cannot legally oblige parliament to do something. The nearest it is possible to get is convention, which in our uncodified constitution has considerable force to restrain Parliament’s behaviour, or alternatively the threat to an MPs job via the ballot box.

On the former, referendums are still a novelty in our constitution, and most of those held so far have supported the status quo, so the convention surrounding parliament’s response to them is weak. On the latter ... well perhaps we shall soon find out.

One solution that has been proposed is for any future Referendum Act to include a clause that automatically enables the outcome. That is a fudge however because it still isn’t obliging Parliament to do anything and doesn’t stop Parliament intervening to repeal that legislation at the last minute.

Re: Brexit
 

If one Parliament cannot bind a future one, then we could overturn all of the EU legislation quite easily.

Re: Brexit
 

How?

Re: Brexit
 

"Chris" claimed "Parliament cannot bind itself or its successors". If that was true then the EU related decisions could be overturned. As they can't be overturned, his statement was false.

Re: Brexit
 

It can mean anything including having American healthcare companies running parts of it since we already have some NHS services out for tender.

The thing is there would be nothing wrong with changing the structure of how the NHS works, France and Germany do not have a monolithic healthcare service run by the government. I think the legitimate worry is the Conservatives most keen on reform do often seem to like the American system rather than the French system, the latter having far more regulation on prices e.t.c.

Also remember the Americans will be in a far stronger position when it comes to negotiations given the size of their economy and the fact we'll really be needing that trade deal.

---------- Post added at 08:00 ---------- Previous post was at 07:58 ----------

Well they could. It's just the consequences stop us from doing so. In the end nothing is stopping us doing whatever we want. What would the EU do? Invade? The reason we abide by international/supranational agreements is because to break them would carry political and economic consequences on the world stage.

Re: Brexit
 

As I've already pointed out, anything that is put out to tender can be done by a company from ANYWHERE. Nothing new.

Re: Brexit
 

Except that under the terms of the trade deal the British government can be sued by American companies if our interventions or regulations impact on profits, iirc American cigarette companies sued the Australian government recently thanks to their trade deal, that's something new

Re: Brexit
 

Wasn't just the US, so nothing to do with any trade agreement.

Re: Brexit
 

Correct, and in theory Parliament can do that. It would, however, put us in violation of international treaties. Parliament, by convention, respects such treaties even though it is sovereign and is not obliged to. As I said last night, don’t underestimate the power of convention.

I’m not going to get into a boring internet argument over this. It’s pretty clear your grasp of the workings of the British constitution is weak. The principle that Parliament cannot bind its successors is fundamental and simply isn’t up for debate here. If that’s the point you’re trying to argue then feel free to yell at yourself in the mirror, because I’ve got better things to do.

Incidentally I’m happy to confirm “Chris” is my actual name, as several members of this forum who have met me in real life will also attest. ;)

Re: Brexit
 

Trump was a bit too honest today:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48507244

Already this is being used in the Tory leadership contest:

https://twitter.com/MattHancock/stat...09336310460419

Re: Brexit
 

Ah yes, the man who received £32,000 in donations from a think tank that wants the NHS abolished.