13,693 comments posted · 43 followers · following 0

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Opposing Chequers is n... · 1 reply · +1 points

I can only speak for myself but when I voted Leave I expected there to be a deal. I didn’t expect the U.K. Gov to be so pusillanimous or spineless or the EU to be so willing to economically self harm their own people just to spite Britain but I expected there to be a deal. Immediately after the disastrous general election in 2017, I would have settled for the EEA or EFTA as an interim measure in order to concentrate on domestic policy which the election demonstrated a clear need for.

Instead May was allowed to stay despite having been shown to be utterly incompetent in office and she has been allowed to abdicate domestic policy in favour of Brexit and achieved something that is markedly inferior to no deal for the sake of actually showing she has a deal.

I would prefer no deal to Chequers and I want May gone otherwise I shan’t bother voting in the next election, no matter what Labour are proposing.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Opposing Chequers is n... · 0 replies · +1 points

A FTA that excludes services, requires us to regulate our economy in line with EU rules rather than as we see fit, that requires us to accept freedom of movement, that requires us to abide by the ECJ as the ultimate arbiter rather than an independent chair with one member from each side, and that requires us to pay for tradeis not a FTA.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Opposing Chequers is n... · 5 replies · +1 points

I don’t think most Leave voters actually wanted a no deal. I think that is just the logical corollary of the EU position on the negotiations. Most of us I suspect wanted a FTA with the freedom to regulate our own economies as we saw fit. That is not unreasonable to anyone who is not in Brussels.

We agree then that Chequers is not a good deal. Why do you then support it rather than a no deal ?

Downing St put out a statement quoting the numbers I quoted you when they stated there would be no second referendum.

I doubt “many” Leave voters have passed away since the referendum. That statement has no basis in fact. Young people may well have voted to Remain, although in my experience most people below 30 voted on the same lines as their parents. Young people also tend to vote Labour but they grow out of that too as they get older.

I don’t think the country is going through hell. It’s just split on Brexit as the debate between you and I shows.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Opposing Chequers is n... · 7 replies · +1 points

Whether no deal commands or does not command popular support has never been tested and I think the maths you use is rather spurious given that, according to Downing St, about 1 m of those who voted Leave would now vote Remin and 1.5 m of those who voted Remain would now vote Leave. Assuming all Remain voters favour some kind of association with the EU, regardless of whether than is in the national interest has no basis in fact just as there is no basis in fact that says no deal does not command majority support.

If Chequers is such a good deal you should sing it’s praises and let those of us who don’t think it us see what that is and try and argue difference. Trying to pick holes in the alternatives without justifying why you favour Chequers shows the bankruptcy of thought that cost Remain the referendum and still characterises thought processes.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Opposing Chequers is n... · 0 replies · +1 points

I agree with much of that but the Tories have to win an election post Brexit if they want to stay in office and have their fear of Corbyn taken seriously. Chequers might be popular in HoC but it is electorally toxic and will become more so as further concessions are made particularly on immigration.

A FTA is the best outcome but no deal will be more popular with the electorate and better for us.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Opposing Chequers is n... · 13 replies · +1 points

The fact that the Gov has been negligent in failing to diligently prepare for a no deal outcome cannot possibly be used as a reason for going ahead with a Chequers deal that has nothing going for it. The article makes a good point in saying that May has not been held to account on her change of position on rules harmonisation that resulted in Chequers. Indeed, no one who supports Chequers has actually made a positive case for it, let alone a good one.

No deal is the only acceptable Brexit outcome if a FTA is off the table or can’t be achieved. An FTA is the only really acceptable negotiated possibility. As Boris said today, Chequers is negotiating under a White Flag. Chequers is not even trying Brexit; it’s simply by-passing it. The recent scrap between French and British fishermen in the Channel shows how pusillanimous our Gov is in defending British interests, and the inherently lawless nature of the EU and French in particular. For all their love of rules, it is surpassed by their love of ignoring them when inconvenient, unlike the British.

Of course, the logical corollary of all this, is that May has to go. Chequers will be very difficult to stop by a Conservative Party paralysed by fear of Jeremy Corbyn, is its chief architect is still in 10 Downing St. we need a leadership contest to get rid of Chequers.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - Chloe Westley: Identit... · 1 reply · +1 points

Pandering to minority sections of the population whether based on religion, gender, skin colour is the antithesis of a cohesive, inclusive society and it is the latter than should be the business of Government.

Gov should be about big ticket items like the economy, standard of living, welfare state, education, health etc The overwhelming need is to get those right and only Thatcher has achieved that in recent times. Pandering to minorities is a sign of failure on the big ticket items and attempt to pick up sectional votes to compensate.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - George Freeman: Come t... · 0 replies · +1 points

The first half of the article is top notch particularly the 4th paragraph. Some of the rest is far too vague particularly about the NHS. Yes, the NHS needs root and branch reform but unless you are prepared to break the principle of free at the point of delivery for everyone for everything then it’s not going to happen. The best forum to discuss NHS reform is a Royal Commission not some Big Tent.

I wish the event well. I wouldn’t trust Nick Boles, the worst planning Minister ever, with a child’s lollipop let alone Brexit or rebooting popular capitalism but Steve Baker and Penny Mordant are very sound.

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - ConHome's monthly surv... · 0 replies · +1 points

What arrant nonsense. Labour have a different position on Brexit every day and are certainly not committed to a soft Brexit even though muppets like Starmer want one. Moreover to suppose that the public are indifferent to Labour’s blatant antisemitism defies all logic

6 weeks ago @ http://www.conservativ... - ConHome's monthly surv... · 1 reply · +1 points

One day you’ll say something sensible. Sadly not today