Don’t forget that EU money OWNS the vast majority of BOTH houses at Westminster.
They own the senior civil service - even MORE so.
Our “swamp to be drained” in this country - is more like Romney Marsh full of Turds rather than the Everglades full of Alligators like the USA has it though…
peirre:
I wonder if Eagerbeaver fancy’s a career change
He’d do about 6 months and then flounce, if his previous actions are anything to go by.
Rjan:
Carryfast:
Rjan:
The issue is that there isn’t a sufficient majority of Tory MPs to force through a hard-right Brexit.Oh wait so we’ve actually been living in a working class paradise since 1973 to date it’s just that it doesn’t seem like it.It’s so much better to maintain Blair’s and Starmer’s status quo of living under the rule of the German banker class.
Than let the Cons get us out and hopefully tear themselves apart doing it then we can chuck em under the bus and let Hoey take over the agenda after.But no Corbyn doesn’t want that because all he can see is the Italian Communist vote helping him to create his EUSSR vision.
You don’t have to support the EU wholeheartedly to realise that the Tory right are intending simply to make things worse for working people.
How many Brexiteers harp on about laws made in Brussels? Well the fact is that the Tories intend to have our laws made in the US as the condition of a trade deal, where standards on virtually everything are worse.
The foremost Tory candidate is planning billions of pounds of tax cuts at the same time as we’re being told money is so tight that we can’t even have our roads maintained properly.
You’ve even got Tory candidates talking about dismissing the very Parliament they said should “take back control”, simply because they won’t dare refer to the people in a GE!
It is the height of idiocy to support the Tory right. Nothing they previously forecast has come true. No improvements are awaiting working people.
You didn’t answer the question what’s stopping us from chucking the Tories under the bus when we’ve got the country back from the EU elites ?.
So tell us exactly what were all these so called ‘improvements’ for ‘working people’ that we had after 1973 to date that we didn’t have in 1972 ?.As opposed to the loss of the right to strike and association,wholesale closure and the transfer of industry and jobs to the EU,massive ‘contributions’ while we impose austerity at home,all for the privilege of an unsustainable trade deficit.
As for the US you want to ■■■■ off one of the only places with which we enjoy a trade surplus in favour of keeping your Kraut banker elite mates happy.On that note,unlike our EU member status,I don’t remember us ever not being able to say to the US if it ain’t in our interests then we won’t do it under our pre EU membership regime.So what’s supposedly changed now given a proper Labour government along the lines of Hoey’s vision not Starmers ?.
switchlogic:
Yep, blame the fact two Brexiteers, Davis & Raab, couldn’t get a decent deal from Europe on the huge catch all group ‘remainers’
To be fair to them, they both resigned on principle. Davies said on LBC that he kept advising May and she went above him with every decision, and Raab went over her ridiculous deal, that was negotiated by herself and remainer civil servant Ollie Robbins. Can’t really blame two people who were only in a ceremonial post, for the ineptitude of the PM and the civil service
My money is on ■■■■■■■■ Johnson …
Carryfast:
Rjan:
…You didn’t answer the question what’s stopping us from chucking the Tories under the bus when we’ve got the country back from the EU elites ?.
I don’t recall the question being put although I may be mistaken.
The obvious thing stopping the Tories being thrown under the bus is that they are entitled to another 5 years of rule each time they are elected. And in that time they may bind us into, for example, a US free trade deal which will have its own treaty rules and separate arbitration courts that can overrule democracy at Westminster, since that has been one of their main prizes all along.
But even separately from that, the Tories can do a lot of harm in power.
Look at how our public services have been hatcheted in the name of austerity and excess debt (to the point where the roads are falling apart at the seams, never mind the hospitals), and yet having done so, rather than paying down any public debt which was said to be urgent, the Tory right are promising substantial tax cuts for the very wealthiest.
And it’s false to suppose their economic management has grown the pie or any old trope like that. Workers on average haven’t had a real-terms pay rise in all the time the Tories have been in power.
So tell us exactly what were all these so called ‘improvements’ for ‘working people’ that we had after 1973 to date that we didn’t have in 1972 ?.As opposed to the loss of the right to strike and association,wholesale closure and the transfer of industry and jobs to the EU,massive ‘contributions’ while we impose austerity at home,all for the privilege of an unsustainable trade deficit.
I’m not arguing with you on any of these points, save that austerity was not imposed by the EU but by the Tory party you now seem to think will be our saviour.
You may think the Tory party are the only ones offering Brexit, without addressing the possibility that they may just be liars, or using it as a cover for a harmful agenda.
As for the US you want to ■■■■ off one of the only places with which we enjoy a trade surplus in favour of keeping your Kraut banker elite mates happy.On that note,unlike our EU member status,I don’t remember us ever not being able to say to the US if it ain’t in our interests then we won’t do it under our pre EU membership regime.So what’s supposedly changed now given a proper Labour government along the lines of Hoey’s vision not Starmers ?.
Does Hoey have a vision? As far as I’m aware she is categorised as neither fish nor fowl in the Labour party, an idiosyncratic character whose relations even with her own constituency are strained. I’m not saying I reject her views, only that I don’t really know what they are.
And as for a trade surplus with the US, most of that apparently is in cars, the very industry that requires the largest market scales, and is apparently contracting on account of Brexit.
It is also very likely that the surplus with the US in this respect depends on the deficit with the rest of the EU for the car parts. That is, the US trade surplus is the corollary of the EU trade deficit.
Thirdly, given that Trump is waging war on the US trade deficit, what makes you think he’s going to do any deal that increases rather than reduces our current surplus?
Fourthly, the US is in fact a poor and squalid place for workers despite being equally developed to European societies. What makes you think more free trade is going to increase workers’ pay and conditions here? Free trade with undercutters just reduces your wages or destroys your industry. That’s what the US itself has found with its massive trade with China.
What does low tariffs on steel mean for the US? It means China ends up with all the blast furnaces and all the workers employed in them.
The reality is that trading freely with the US is just involving ourselves in their same ideological folly that has decimated their working class since the Nixon adminstration.
Rjan:
Carryfast:
Rjan:
…You didn’t answer the question what’s stopping us from chucking the Tories under the bus when we’ve got the country back from the EU elites ?.
I don’t recall the question being put although I may be mistaken.
The obvious thing stopping the Tories being thrown under the bus is that they are entitled to another 5 years of rule each time they are elected. And in that time they may bind us into, for example, a US free trade deal which will have its own treaty rules and separate arbitration courts that can overrule democracy at Westminster, since that has been one of their main prizes all along.
But even separately from that, the Tories can do a lot of harm in power.
Look at how our public services have been hatcheted in the name of austerity and excess debt (to the point where the roads are falling apart at the seams, never mind the hospitals), and yet having done so, rather than paying down any public debt which was said to be urgent, the Tory right are promising substantial tax cuts for the very wealthiest.
And it’s false to suppose their economic management has grown the pie or any old trope like that. Workers on average haven’t had a real-terms pay rise in all the time the Tories have been in power.
So tell us exactly what were all these so called ‘improvements’ for ‘working people’ that we had after 1973 to date that we didn’t have in 1972 ?.As opposed to the loss of the right to strike and association,wholesale closure and the transfer of industry and jobs to the EU,massive ‘contributions’ while we impose austerity at home,all for the privilege of an unsustainable trade deficit.
I’m not arguing with you on any of these points, save that austerity was not imposed by the EU but by the Tory party you now seem to think will be our saviour.
You may think the Tory party are the only ones offering Brexit, without addressing the possibility that they may just be liars, or using it as a cover for a harmful agenda.
As for the US you want to ■■■■ off one of the only places with which we enjoy a trade surplus in favour of keeping your Kraut banker elite mates happy.On that note,unlike our EU member status,I don’t remember us ever not being able to say to the US if it ain’t in our interests then we won’t do it under our pre EU membership regime.So what’s supposedly changed now given a proper Labour government along the lines of Hoey’s vision not Starmers ?.
Does Hoey have a vision? As far as I’m aware she is categorised as neither fish nor fowl in the Labour party, an idiosyncratic character whose relations even with her own constituency are strained. I’m not saying I reject her views, only that I don’t really know what they are.
And as for a trade surplus with the US, most of that apparently is in cars, the very industry that requires the largest market scales, and is apparently contracting on account of Brexit.
It is also very likely that the surplus with the US in this respect depends on the deficit with the rest of the EU for the car parts. That is, the US trade surplus is the corollary of the EU trade deficit.
Thirdly, given that Trump is waging war on the US trade deficit, what makes you think he’s going to do any deal that increases rather than reduces our current surplus?
Fourthly, the US is in fact a poor and squalid place for workers despite being equally developed to European societies. What makes you think more free trade is going to increase workers’ pay and conditions here? Free trade with undercutters just reduces your wages or destroys your industry. That’s what the US itself has found with its massive trade with China.
What does low tariffs on steel mean for the US? It means China ends up with all the blast furnaces and all the workers employed in them.
The reality is that trading freely with the US is just involving ourselves in their same ideological folly that has decimated their working class since the Nixon adminstration.
OK I’ll put the question again.
Brexit isn’t the same thing as the choice between Tory or Labour at home within our own parliament.
So what’s stopping us having both ( proper ) Brexit and a Labour government.Just as we had numerous Labour governments before we joined the EU.The difference being that such a government won’t then be hamstrung by EU regulation stopping proper Labour Party stuff.You know like state support of strategic industries and free trade when it suits us and protectionism and closing down free trade when it doesn’t.
As for increasing trade with the US it’s not rocket science to understand that more US imports mean more US jobs and consumer spending.Meaning more actual US exports within an environment of overall increased trade.IE a trade surplus is still a surplus even if it’s reduced by 50% which is still a net gain if overall trade between us increases by 60% or even let’s call it a 90% reduction in that surplus v a 100 % increase in overall trade.
Unlike the stitch up we are subjected to with the EU in paying a fortune for the privilege of a massive trade deficit.
As for China remind us when the EU closed down trade with China not according to just about every shop in the country dealing in manufactured goods.As opposed to asking for US made products as you could do in any tool shop or car dealer for example worthy of the name up to the mid 1970’s. 
Rjan:
Fourthly, the US is in fact a poor and squalid place for workers despite being equally developed to European societies.
Oh wait but you find it perfectly acceptable to trade freely with countries like Poland,Bulgaria and Romania with a minimum wage of 523,286 and 446 Euros per month respectively v the US’ $ 7.65 per hour.Strange double standards you seem to be applying in that case.
I’ve said before that I’m unhappy with the system whereby we get a new PM chosen by a small non democratic group.
.
The new PM should of course be bound by the same promises in the winning party’s manifesto. In this case that includes leaving the EU.
.
Isn’t it ironic that the terms we may leave with are increasingly likely to be on WTO crash out terms, when the Leave manifesto spoke of deals, agreements, etc?
Is it irony or insanity that an honourable Gov could try to defend a dishonoured promise?
Franglais:
I’ve said before that I’m unhappy with the system whereby we get a new PM chosen by a small non democratic group.
.
The new PM should of course be bound by the same promises in the winning party’s manifesto. In this case that includes leaving the EU.
.
Isn’t it ironic that the terms we may leave with are increasingly likely to be on WTO crash out terms, when the Leave manifesto spoke of deals, agreements, etc?
Is it irony or insanity that an honourable Gov could try to defend a dishonoured promise?
It’s laughable that remainers try to tell us what the Leave manifesto was when I’ve still got leaflets from the campaign clearly stating that the aim was to return the sovereignty lost to the EU government in full.Not just a bit or just some of it but all of it.They also clearly state that we would no longer be bound by the common fisheries policy,nor EU trade policies,nor the ECJ’s rulings including ‘free movement’.Nor would we be liable to continuing EU ‘contributions’.IE Leave means Leave not partly leave.Let alone the cross party Remain alliance’s BRINO stitch up.
While it’s equally clear that there’s no way that the EU could possibly reach any bs ‘deal’ on any of that because the whole scam is built on the blackmail of sovereignty ( and cash in our case ),for trade.Trade that in our case is also just a deficit liability to us.
In which case the only ‘deal’ we’d need from the EU would be along the lines of it understands our reasons for leaving and the terms we’ve left on as shown above.The EU intends to leave the conditions of the single market in force with the UK no longer an EU member state as a gesture of good will.If the UK so wishes.
To which my answer would be no thanks why would we want to continue with a trading relationship which is all in Germany’s favour and has been since we joined.
switchlogic:
Rory Stewart
That is my choice from the 10 for Number 10
Franglais:
I’ve said before that I’m unhappy with the system whereby we get a new PM chosen by a small non democratic group.
.
The new PM should of course be bound by the same promises in the winning party’s manifesto. In this case that includes leaving the EU.
.
Isn’t it ironic that the terms we may leave with are increasingly likely to be on WTO crash out terms, when the Leave manifesto spoke of deals, agreements, etc?
Is it irony or insanity that an honourable Gov could try to defend a dishonoured promise?
Maybe her Majesty will have a word in the shell like of whoever goes to collect the council house key. 
Wheel Nut:
Franglais:
I’ve said before that I’m unhappy with the system whereby we get a new PM chosen by a small non democratic group.
.
The new PM should of course be bound by the same promises in the winning party’s manifesto. In this case that includes leaving the EU.
.
Isn’t it ironic that the terms we may leave with are increasingly likely to be on WTO crash out terms, when the Leave manifesto spoke of deals, agreements, etc?
Is it irony or insanity that an honourable Gov could try to defend a dishonoured promise?Maybe her Majesty will have a word in the shell like of whoever goes to collect the council house key.
Opening the vote to the public is political suicide, the remainers would vote for the worst candidate to sabotage Brexit even further, and force a GE and that would fail to deliver the leavers vote
Grumpy Dad:
Wheel Nut:
Franglais:
I’ve said before that I’m unhappy with the system whereby we get a new PM chosen by a small non democratic group.
.
The new PM should of course be bound by the same promises in the winning party’s manifesto. In this case that includes leaving the EU.
.
Isn’t it ironic that the terms we may leave with are increasingly likely to be on WTO crash out terms, when the Leave manifesto spoke of deals, agreements, etc?
Is it irony or insanity that an honourable Gov could try to defend a dishonoured promise?Maybe her Majesty will have a word in the shell like of whoever goes to collect the council house key.
Opening the vote to the public is political suicide, the remainers would vote for the worst candidate to sabotage Brexit even further, and force a GE and that would fail to deliver the leavers vote
So you are OK with one public vote,
the referendum, but not another public vote, on PM?
.
What of those Brexiteers who complain of the ‘undemocratic’ way Commissioners are elected but are happy to be chosen in this way?
.
And what of the bald hypocrisy of those who ‘want to return power to Parliament’ but talk of forcing Brexit through even if Parliament as a whole says no?
.
Anyone who wants to be PM, in the honest belief they can sort this mess out, should be disqualified as a nutter. Only someone sensible enough to see it’s impossible and thankless should get it.
Joseph Heller is chuckling away somewhere!
There should not be a public vote, as the vote is for the leader of the Conservative party, and only party members are eligible. Want a say, join the party. Don’t agree with Conservative politics, keep out. The party are in government, this isn’t a general election, so non members have no need or right to vote
Be careful what you wish for suggesting a public vote for PM, though that may come to pass if the Tories are stupid enough to foil Brexit once more as the Brexit Party may well rewrite the political bible, which is well past its sell by date anyway.
Present reckoning the country would probably elect President Farage by a landslide, wouldn’t bother me in the least but lefties/remainers would be self detonating in the aisles, an event i’d pay good money to watch.
Juddian:
Be careful what you wish for suggesting a public vote for PM, though that may come to pass if the Tories are stupid enough to foil Brexit once more as the Brexit Party may well rewrite the political bible, which is well past its sell by date anyway.Present reckoning the country would probably elect President Farage by a landslide, wouldn’t bother me in the least but lefties/remainers would be self detonating in the aisles, an event i’d pay good money to watch.
[emoji5][emoji28][emoji5]
Touchė
.
Good post Juddian.
But the same greater public that would vote in St Nigel, would vote for lower taxes AND better hospitals. They want better welfare for animals, but buy the cheapest meets.
They want what isn’t realistically achievable.
.
Adam Smith founded his economic principles on the basis that the public would always act in their own best interest. Time and time again this has been priced wrong.
But some still stick to it.
.
So long as “good commuicators” convince the public that the impossible IS possible we will have problems.
Farage is a good communicator…
.
.
By the way, much as I wish to think of myself as a totally rational, independently minded, unprejudiced, thinker, I fully accept I am just one more, human and fallible, individual.
.
Edit to add.
Robert Maxwell (?) said
“People will always believe lies they WANT to be true”. A lesson learnt by many politicos.
Franglais:
Grumpy Dad:
Wheel Nut:
Franglais:
I’ve said before that I’m unhappy with the system whereby we get a new PM chosen by a small non democratic group.
.
The new PM should of course be bound by the same promises in the winning party’s manifesto. In this case that includes leaving the EU.
.
Isn’t it ironic that the terms we may leave with are increasingly likely to be on WTO crash out terms, when the Leave manifesto spoke of deals, agreements, etc?
Is it irony or insanity that an honourable Gov could try to defend a dishonoured promise?Maybe her Majesty will have a word in the shell like of whoever goes to collect the council house key.
Opening the vote to the public is political suicide, the remainers would vote for the worst candidate to sabotage Brexit even further, and force a GE and that would fail to deliver the leavers vote
So you are OK with one public vote,
the referendum, but not another public vote, on PM?
.
What of those Brexiteers who complain of the ‘undemocratic’ way Commissioners are elected but are happy to be chosen in this way?
.
And what of the bald hypocrisy of those who ‘want to return power to Parliament’ but talk of forcing Brexit through even if Parliament as a whole says no?
.
Anyone who wants to be PM, in the honest belief they can sort this mess out, should be disqualified as a nutter. Only someone sensible enough to see it’s impossible and thankless should get it.
Joseph Heller is chuckling away somewhere!
Franglais to be totally honest, I couldn’t give a flying fig about all this now, it’s a total and utter farce made worse by people who complain about the fairness or lack of it in proceedings.
Just ask yourself wether it would be fair and non biased for a remainer to vote for a leader of the opposition ?
Bearing in mind that there’s a greater percentage of remaining Tory party members than leavers who could quite easily damage the vote when it’s finally whittled down to 2.
Wheel Nut:
switchlogic:
Rory StewartThat is my choice from the 10 for Number 10
Nah, he’s never had a decent record out since the 80s, and he’s far too ■■■■ old now to be singing ‘‘Do you think I’m ■■■■’’
Why are you remainers even bothered about which PM anyway?
If I were you lot I’d be too busy building a shelter for the apocalypse that you are all predicting after we leave the EU, and looking forward to life in Armageddon. 
Sorry, maybe I’m far too layed back (or is it laid back ) but I just find all this stuff amusing, …truckers wanting to be politicians.
Chill out ffs and enjoy the ride.
As Doris Day once said (and The Gibson Brothers)
Que Sera. 