Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

As Jo Swinson put it, we are at series one of a box set of 10 as far as Brexit is concerned. At least they are honest about spending plans, and get approval from the IFS. Cannot say the same for either Tories or Labour.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

They are being alarmist about Brexit. Trade deals can take years, but the one we want with the EU should be relatively straight forward to negotiate, given that our exported products already meet their standards.

I'm not worried about the Conservative spending plans. They are modest compared with the other two parties, and the Conservatives aren't exactly reckless with the economy, are they?

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

The Canada deal took 7 years to negotiate, Bozza's promise that Brexit will be 'oven ready' sorted next month or even by the end of next year is another of his lies. Or maybe he's genuinely thick.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

That statement is completely speculative.

Equally as we are 2 trillion in debt with the Tories and the coalition in power for 27 of the last 40 years, despite the windfalls of privatisation, I think it’s demonstrably laughable that the Conservatives aren’t reckless with the economy. That’s without even getting onto Brexit, which by any measure going will weaken the economy.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

I'm calling absolute BS on this. I mean, I have to admire your brass neck for trying to average out national debt increases over the last 40 years in order to blame the Tories for it, but how about we introduce some actual facts into the debate.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1575130174

When you look at where the significant increases in national debt have actually occurred, it's obvious that the one very significant change to the long term trend was spending initiated by Labour during the financial crisis from 2008 onwards.

Obviously the structural deficit that ensued meant the Coalition years saw that figure continue to increase, but then that gives the lie to those on the left that like to simultaneously blame the Tories for the size of the national debt, whilst also trying to claim austerity was never necessary.

In fact the only significant upwards movement in national debt under the Tories, that can be pinned solely on Tory economic policy, is the spike caused by our crash out of the ERM in 1992, and frankly in comparison to where we are now, that looks no worse than someone letting their Christmas shopping get a bit out of hand.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

It’s 40 years of neo-liberal capitalist economics that has lead to here. Selling everything off helped massage the figures in the interim. But here we are saddled with all the debt and no more windfalls.

Your graph will also be skewed by changes in GDP, as opposed to considering the real terms value of the debt itself.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

Inflation also skews the real-terms value of the debt - i didn't see you hurrying to make appropriate caveats to your bald figure of £2tn. Besides, the impact of GDP is a perfectly right and proper consideration. The debt is only a problem if it can't be serviced. GDP indicates how serviceable the debt is, which is why it is relevant, and why the PA chose to express the national debt in those terms in that graph.

Further ... loose monetary policy was a far greater contributor to the supposed 'massaging' of public sector net debt in the second half of the 1980s than selling off state monopolies, though I grant you, getting unprofitable heavy industries like coal and steel off the balance sheet did it no harm. Ultimately we can't tell where monetary policy might have ended up because the ERM debacle intervened.

And on that point, I note that many of the same people who said we should be in the ERM, also said we should be in the Euro, and continue to say we should be in the EU. But I digress.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

But would enter a transition period during which it would continue to follow all EU rules and regulations and continue to pay the same amount of money into the EU budget, and the transition would be due to end in December 2020.

So we would have left the EU, but still following all the rules and pay the same as before - is that like leaving home, but still sleeping in the same bedroom, eating meals with the family, and paying your share of the bills? ;)

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

No it doesn’t, which is why I said real terms to create a distinction between inflation adjusted (real terms) and not inflation adjusted (nominal terms).

GDP doesn’t indicate how serviceable the debt is at all. It’s only an indication if the Government enjoys it’s share of the wealth through taxation. With debt at £2 trillion I’m contending that for the last 40 years it hasn’t.

I’m sure Governments of both colours have used plenty of tricks to massage the figures over the years. I’m not here to defend them.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

Yes, well David Davies had his strategy ruined by Theresa May, didn't he? We did actually get a withdrawal agreement agreed within the two-year period, and Boris Johnson managed to renegotiate the parts of it which were causing problems for us within three short months. The EU hasn't held anything up, that was Parliament's fault.

Provided that we get a strong Conservative majority at the next election, I have no doubt that we can do a trade deal with the EU within the year.

Other countries will take longer, but not too long. Many of the useful provisions that we are currently getting through the EU can just be cut and pasted into draft new agreements with the countries concerned and then adjusted as necessary. The negotiations can then be based on that as a UK proposal.

I don't think a Conservative government under BJ would be so weak-kneed as to accept being drawn into any tie-up with EU rules beyond what is strictly necessary for our new trading arrangements. Any attempt by the EU to have us accept standardised employment laws, for example, will be rejected out of hand.

---------- Post added at 19:34 ---------- Previous post was at 19:31 ----------

Except that we don't have to bring our standards into line as Canada did. A year is perfectly do-able.

---------- Post added at 19:36 ---------- Previous post was at 19:34 ----------

It is unquestionable that our standards already meet EU standards. What are you on?

As far as your second paragraph is concerned, that is untrue and your point has already been answered.

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

The point has not been answered. It’s an outright lie to claim it has. It makes me wonder what, indeed, you are on? The propaganda machine is in overdrive tonight, ladies and gentlemen.

Adhering to EU standards at present and getting an EU trade deal aren’t one and the same thing. There would be issues around state aid, agriculture, fisheries all just to kick things off. Unless of course you are suggesting we stay in CAP and CFP?

Re: Election 2019 - Week 4
 

No amount of pontification on your part will convince anyone that the debt crisis wasn't caused by Labour. But I have to give it to you, you have a talent for attempting to convince us that black is white. You are not succeeding.

---------- Post added at 19:42 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------

That's right. Brexit will have happened once we start negotiating a trade deal. The remainers do seem to be very confused about this whole subject.