The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[tonyh29]

40 minutes ago, peterms said:

If you read her comments, she simply mentions some possible provision concerning benefit entitlements, and she emphasises  the importance of free movement.

In other words, it's a restatement of something said months ago, a "solution" to something that isn't a problem in the real world despite the fury in the Mail about supposed "benefit fourism".  And that "solution" must be set in the context of free movement.

Ah the traditional Mail comment at least you don't disappoint 

 

Merkel and others have gone from no ifs or buts to already suggesting they are prepared to change their position , something that us stupid Mail readers said would happen whilst you guardian reading intellectuals said Europe will invoke project spite to teach us a lesson 

yeah newspaper insults are boring 

 

Edited November 16, 2016 by tonyh29

[tonyh29]

11 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Backed herself into a tight little corner over there.  

She in trouble and she knows it.  She is throwing that out as a last resort to possibly influence the French election also but I genuinely feel the EU as it is now is slowly slipping between her fingers.

Yeah that's my take on it 

[Awol]

26 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Backed herself into a tight little corner over there.  

She in trouble and she knows it.  She is throwing that out as a last resort to possibly influence the French election also but I genuinely feel the EU as it is now is slowly slipping between her fingers.

Given the Russians involvement in the US election we can probably expect them to release her Stasi file to wikileaks next year. Should be fun! 

[peterms]

9 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Ah the traditional Mail comment at least you don't disappoint 

 

Merkel and others have gone from no ifs or buts to already suggesting they are prepared to change their position , something that us stupid Mail readers said would happen whilst you guardian reading intellectuals said Europe will invoke project spite to teach us a lesson 

yeah newspaper insults are boring 

 

Read what she says.

Quote

“Were we to make an exception for the free movement of people with Britain, this would mean we would endanger principles of the whole internal market in the European Union, because everyone else will then want these exceptions,” Merkel told a meeting of the German employers’ association BDA.

But on the finer detail of defining the free movement of people, she added: “I personally am of the view that we will have to discuss further with the [European] commission when this freedom of movement applies from.”

Merkel said that if, for example, someone came to Germany from eastern Europe and worked only for a short time but acquired a lifelong claim on welfare benefits, “then I see a question about which we must talk again. Free movement applies to me in the sense that the employee himself earns the money he needs for himself and his family in the other member state.”

In what respect is this different from what Cameron came back with months ago, universally derided as nothing substantive?  You claim it is a change of position - can you explain how?

The reference to the Mail is that the notion that vast numbers of EU immigrants are flocking over here to live off benefits is simply a lie, propounded largely but not only by the Mail.  Cameron was seeking to claim a negotiating victory by pointing to a "concession" that addresses something which isn't actually a problem.  Part of the reason why his own backbenchers were so dismissive of his claims was that they know, though probably won't admit it openly, that this is to all intents and purposes a non-issue.

And the context in which this discussion of the detail would take place is this:

Quote

So far the bloc has portrayed the single market, which Britain may subsequently try to retain membership of, as a package of principles rather than a menu that Britain can pick and choose from. Merkel reiterated that broad principle, telling the BDA: “In my firm view, we cannot wobble on the basic principle of free movement of people.”

The chancellor said it was paradoxical that Britain had criticised Germany and other EU states for using so-called transitional arrangements to temporarily restrict the free movement of workers from eastern European countries that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007, but now wanted to restrict movement across the bloc. “That is not on,” she said.

So the substantive position remains unchanged, and Merkel has simply repeated one little bit of spin aimed at creating the impression that Cameron achieved something, to save face.  This changes nothing.

Here.

 

[tonyh29]

51 minutes ago, peterms said:

So the substantive position remains unchanged,

Merkel (and co)  is out to save her neck , the position has changed  .... Project Fear , Project Spite didn't work , now begins Project cling to power

The Mail bit is still tedious , I've posted countless times my reasons , as did Trent in another thread .. why it's almost like nobody reads what we say , too busy getting ready the next Little Englander or Daily Mail jibe .

 

 

[tonyh29]

more Brexit bad news

 

Figures covering the first three months after the Brexit vote show the unemployment rate falling to its lowest level for 11 years.

[Chindie]

There genuinely is bad news out there.

And bearing in mind this is before anything has actually happened.

And employment figures are notoriously useless as I'm sure you'll have pointed out before

[tonyh29]

1 minute ago, Chindie said:

And employment figures are notoriously useless as I'm sure you'll have pointed out before

indeed  .. the figures are always massaged

 

However , it's kinda amusing really that this sort of good news when previously presented by others I  would question it only to be told I'm wrong  ..and now I present that same good news and get told I'm wrong again  

 

why it's like we've changed governments in the meantime  or something

 

 

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

1 hour ago, peterms said:

package of principles

I think this is the problem,  the principles are not held, believed or wanted by the majority,  Why does she not understand this.

 

 

[peterms]

1 hour ago, tonyh29 said:

Merkel (and co)  is out to save her neck , the position has changed  .... Project Fear , Project Spite didn't work , now begins Project cling to power

You don't explain in what way you believe it to have changed, you simply again assert that it has.  Of course, it hasn't.

From an updated article:

Quote

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, also appeared to be standing firm on defending the fundamental principle of free movement within the EU on Tuesday but conceded there could be room for further discussion around whether welfare benefits should be immediately available for life if an EU citizen moves to another member state.

and

Quote

Boris Johnson is promising the British people a Brexit deal that is “intellectually impossible” and “politically unavailable”, according to the Dutch finance minister and Eurogroup president.

Jeroen Dijsselbloem delivered a scathing attack on Johnson after the foreign secretary claimed the UK would probably be leaving the customs union while also seeking free trade with the EU and extra immigration controls.

Dijsselbloem told the BBC’s Newsnight: “I think he’s offering to the British people options that are really not available. For example, to say we could be inside the internal market but be outside the customs union, this is impossible, it just doesn’t exist. The opposite does exist. We have a customs union with Turkey but Turkey is not part of the internal market.

“He’s saying things that are intellectually impossible, politically unavailable, so I think he’s not offering the British people a fair view of what is available and what can be achieved in these negotiations.”...

...The government’s Brexit strategy also came under fire on Tuesday from an Italian minister, who described it as chaotic and slammed the UK for holding the EU hostage to Conservative party infighting.

“Somebody needs to tell us something, and it needs to be something that makes sense,” Carlo Calenda, the Italian economic development minister, told Bloomberg. “You can’t say that it’s sensible to say we want access to the single market but no free circulation of people. It’s obvious that doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.”

Calenda, a former Italian envoy to Brussels, said: “There’s lots of chaos and we don’t understand what the position is,” Calenda said. “It’s all becoming an internal UK debate, which is not OK.” The British government “needs to sit down, put its cards on the table and negotiate”, he said.

In further negative comments on Johnson’s personal strategy, Calenda said the UK foreign secretary had told him during a recent meeting that Italy would grant Britain access to the EU’s single market “because you don’t want to lose prosecco exports”.

 

[blandy]

3 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

Merkel and others have gone from no ifs or buts to already suggesting they are prepared to change their position , something that us stupid Mail readers said would happen

No they haven't. Not an iota. Mail (and other papers') readers might really really want it to happen, but it hasn't. It won't.

[Awol]

4 hours ago, blandy said:

No they haven't. Not an iota. Mail (and other papers') readers might really really want it to happen, but it hasn't. It won't.

Fortunately you're right. The last thing we want is the EU going wobbly on free movement, the Government might then think they had a fighting chance of chinning off the referendum result.

Edit: I'm expecting a spring GE to give the Remainers one last crack at doing that. 

Edited November 16, 2016 by Awol

[villaglint]

Who are these remainers you talk of AWOL? 

I know they are 48% of those that voted and no doubt a few more by now who didn't realise their entire lives would immediately get 20% more expensive. 

However other than the 7MPs (guesstimate) of the Lib Dems there doesn't seem to be a party out there who is not proBrexit. 

[Awol]

1 minute ago, villaglint said:

Who are these remainers you talk of AWOL? 

I know they are 48% of those that voted and no doubt a few more by now who didn't realise their entire lives would immediately get 20% more expensive. 

However other than the 7MPs (guesstimate) of the Lib Dems there doesn't seem to be a party out there who is not proBrexit. 

As soon as Labour sniff a GE they'll be back on the Remain bus in a heartbeat. 

It'll be called before an Article 50 vote in Parliament due to the Courts causing significant delay in triggering the process, and be a single issue rather than a party focused election to give May her own mandate - or not.

Get a tenner on it. 

[HanoiVillan]

6 minutes ago, Awol said:

As soon as Labour sniff a GE they'll be back on the Remain bus in a heartbeat. 

It'll be called before an Article 50 vote in Parliament due to the Courts causing significant delay in triggering the process, and be a single issue rather than a party focused election to give May her own mandate - or not.

Get a tenner on it. 

Fixed Term Parliaments Act?

[Awol]

8 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Fixed Term Parliaments Act?

Can be got around if 2/3rds of MP's vote for a GE. The FTPA took away PM's right to call it unilaterally and put it in the hands of Parliament instead if the Government wanted to call one early.

If May goes to the HoC and says she wants to hold a GE and forces a vote, could the opposition parties say "no thanks"? They'd destroy themselves.

[HanoiVillan]

4 minutes ago, Awol said:

Can be got around if 2/3rds of MP's vote for a GE. The FTPA took away PM's right to call it unilaterally and put it in the hands of Parliament instead if the Government wanted to call one early.

If May goes to the HoC and says she wants to hold a GE and forces a vote, could the opposition parties say "no thanks"? They'd destroy themselves.

Labour are 15 points behind in the polls. They'd destroy themselves just as much by saying yes. I mean, they might feel they have to, but I don't think it's cut-and-dried. 

[blandy]

35 minutes ago, Awol said:

It'll be called before an Article 50 vote in Parliament due to the Courts causing significant delay in triggering the process, and be a single issue rather than a party focused election to give May her own mandate - or not.

Get a tenner on it. 

Not a cat in hell's chance. Money down the drain.

Firstly, pretty much all of the MPs accept the result was "Leave" and even if they themselves are/were in favour of staying they recognise that the referendum result said the Country should leave. So they will vote in Parliament to Leave.

Secondly - the Courts - it's the Gov't incompetence that would cause any "delay" - the Gov't, as always, merely has to follow the law, even if they don't like the law. Sovereignty of Parliament and all that.

Thirdly, May basically said "No early election" so to break that pledge would make her look...well, y'know.

[Awol]

If the Supreme Court rule that the 1972 EC Act can't be repealed before a replacement is prepared it will derail the timelines completely. 

If that's the case I agree that May will want to go ahead anyway but will try to get a GE win behind her to strengthen her hand. Events dear boy.. etc. 

I know it doesn't look likely but think it may play out that way.

Edited November 16, 2016 by Awol

[Awol]

43 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Labour are 15 points behind in the polls. They'd destroy themselves just as much by saying yes. I mean, they might feel they have to, but I don't think it's cut-and-dried. 

Any opposition party that refuses an explicit shot at the title is commiting long term suicide, imo. That's what they exist for.