Getting brexit done!

[Rain King]

1 hour ago, Voll Blau said:

So much for a new era of freedom and democracy... 

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/news-organisations-walk-out-no-21422084

Jeremy Corbyn's fault IIRC 🙄

[String fellow]

Laura Kuenssberg's job is to report politics, not to play at politics herself.

[Jon the Hat]

There are some serious mdeia / government powerplays going on here - it will be interesting to see whether the power of the media is indeed as reduced as Number 10 thinks;  they seem more then happy to pitch directly to the public Trump style.  The days of the adversarial QT / Today program type of soundbite barrage might well be over.

Edited 3 February 2020 by Jon the Hat

[Legend_in_blue]

4 hours ago, Innovindil said:

With the rumours Boris is planning on bringing the diesel/petrol ban forward then it is time to back it 100%, get Nissan producing the leaf here, get the foundations for an electrical network for cars down and get the subsidies back to make it affordable for the people and worth Nissan's while. It's the perfect opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. 

There's not a chance of any ban moving forwards when the new Corsa e costs over 30 grand, close to 35 grand in fact.  And Bojo can forget trying to force the Nissan Leaf onto people as a viable alternative.

 

 

Edited 3 February 2020 by Legend_in_blue

[Charl91]

Can't believe Boris is getting so upset by media and newspapers saying mean things about him that he has to ban the particular ones he doesn't like. 

 

Bloody snowflake generation.

[Strokes]

3 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

There's not a chance of any ban moving forwards when the new Corsa e costs over 30 grand, close to 35 grand in fact.  And Bojo can forget trying to force the Nissan Leaf onto people as a viable alternative.

 

 

They’ll need to subsidies but if it ends up with no deal that can be done through import tax gained from imported cars. Which will make them competitive.

[WigstonWanderer]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

There are some serious mdeia / government powerplays going on here - it will be interesting to see whether the power of the media is indeed as reduced as Number 10 thinks;  they seem more then happy to pitch directly to the public Trump style.  The days of the adversarial QT / Today program type of soundbite barrage might well be over.

You mean the days of proper scrutiny are over. I think that much was obvious during the election when Cummings hid Johnson away. The success of that move seems to have emboldened them to remain aloof.

 

This is a real weakening of democracy that will eventually affect both sides of the political divide.

[Kopfkino]

13 hours ago, bovril said:

I hear Johnson's going to demolish another of Project Fear's lies - no chance we're going to trade on WTO terms after this year, but we could end up with an Australia-type deal 

Fully expect to end this year with Boris proclaiming we have a better deal with the EU than the moon does. 

[Guest MattP]

Really need to get to grips with the media relations, can take on the reform in the BBC (that horrible histories video btw WTF, like they are trying to commit suicide) over the next few years but looking like you are angling for a fight isn't going to go down well.

 

No problem with boycotting C4 at all given their behaviour but you can't just treat like shit a huge bloc of the press.

Edited 4 February 2020 by MattP

[Alf Bentley]

After the UK and EU statements yesterday on negotiating priorities (linked), Stephen Bush thinks Brexit on WTO terms is quite likely - though presumably with another/other agreements on issues like security & fishing, if I understand him right:

 

"The British government and the European Commission have published their negotiating mandates - via a written ministerial statement in the case of the British and a memo in the case of EuCo - as the two sides prepare for a year of talks about the shape of the EU-UK free trade agreement. The UK's written ministerial statement was accompanied by a speech by Boris Johnson, but you can safely ignore that: it was solely rhetorical and had little of substance as far as policy is concerned. The real meat is in that written ministerial statement: what does it tell us about the areas of unity and disagreement going into these talks? There is a unity as far as the outcome goes: both sides know that their combined preferences on regulation means that they are looking for a barebones trade agreement with a security treaty on top. There are comparatively minor differences on fishing and the structure of the agreement (the EU wants a single association agreement, the UK wants multiple accords) but the big point of disagreement is on rules and referees. Rules: all trade agreements involve a measure of regulatory alignment, and the biggest one here,  are the requirements to maintain a level playing field after Brexit, particularly on state aid. From the British government's perspective, because they are asking for a trade agreement that would secure the same level of market access to the EU as enjoyed by Canada, they shouldn't have to sign up to a stronger set of level playing field provisions. From the perspective of the Commission and EU member states, because the UK is right on the EU's doorstep, a Canada-style trade agreement would have to include tougher provisions on state aid and other level-playing field matters.  Referees: all trade agreements include a dispute mechanism in case one party or another is believed to be backsliding on their obligations. As far as the EU is concerned, that means a role for the European Court of Justice. But at the British end, the government wants to take the UK out of the domestic reach of the ECJ.  In most trade talks, particularly between the regional hegemon and their near-neighbours, these disputes end one way: the bigger country or bloc gets 90 per cent of what it wants and the smaller one gets 10 per cent. You can see the landing zone for such a deal - on referees, one in which the ECJ has no purchase in domestic legislation but it is in practice the ultimate arbiter in all trades disputes, and one in which the UK, which in any case has historically and in the present doesn't even use all of the freedoms it has as an EU member on state aid signs away powers that it has little appetite to exercise as far as the level playing field goes.  But there's a big reason why that might not happen this time: frankly, what tends to force those compromises is the scale of the prize on offer. Because the UK is explicitly aiming, as that written ministerial statement puts it, to be outside the customs union and outside the single market by the end of the year, the economic cost of a free trade agreement on the terms envisaged by both sides is not a great deal smaller than the economic cost of an exit on WTO terms. The incentive to blink at the British end is considerably smaller than it was last year. Just because both sides are starting far closer together than they did the last phase doesn't necessarily mean that it will have the same ending".

[Jon the Hat]

14 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

You mean the days of proper scrutiny are over. I think that much was obvious during the election when Cummings hid Johnson away. The success of that move seems to have emboldened them to remain aloof.

 

This is a real weakening of democracy that will eventually affect both sides of the political divide.

I am not sure you can call QT proper scrutiny to be honest.  Its a soundbite shouting fest which doesn't allo any development of the argument.

 

The media needs to evolve to be able to call on experts (not the man in the street ffs) to decipher and fact check what is being said.  So instead of ignoring Boris' Brexit statement they should show it and then critique it.  Not just ignore it in the hope that everyone doesn't watch it on Youtube / Twitter and take it at face value.  That helps no one.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

Really need to get to grips with the media relations, can take on the reform in the BBC (that horrible histories video btw WTF, like they are trying to commit suicide) over the next few years but looking like you are angling for a fight isn't going to go down well.

 

No problem with boycotting C4 at all given their behaviour but you can't just treat like shit a huge bloc of the press.

It's unclear what they are playing at - it's a rather confused plan tbh.  Whole lobby invited for some things, partial for others with no clear picture why.

[Jon the Hat]

24 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

After the UK and EU statements yesterday on negotiating priorities (linked), Stephen Bush thinks Brexit on WTO terms is quite likely - though presumably with another/other agreements on issues like security & fishing, if I understand him right:

 

"The British government and the European Commission have published their negotiating mandates - via a written ministerial statement in the case of the British and a memo in the case of EuCo - as the two sides prepare for a year of talks about the shape of the EU-UK free trade agreement. The UK's written ministerial statement was accompanied by a speech by Boris Johnson, but you can safely ignore that: it was solely rhetorical and had little of substance as far as policy is concerned. The real meat is in that written ministerial statement: what does it tell us about the areas of unity and disagreement going into these talks? There is a unity as far as the outcome goes: both sides know that their combined preferences on regulation means that they are looking for a barebones trade agreement with a security treaty on top. There are comparatively minor differences on fishing and the structure of the agreement (the EU wants a single association agreement, the UK wants multiple accords) but the big point of disagreement is on rules and referees. Rules: all trade agreements involve a measure of regulatory alignment, and the biggest one here,  are the requirements to maintain a level playing field after Brexit, particularly on state aid. From the British government's perspective, because they are asking for a trade agreement that would secure the same level of market access to the EU as enjoyed by Canada, they shouldn't have to sign up to a stronger set of level playing field provisions. From the perspective of the Commission and EU member states, because the UK is right on the EU's doorstep, a Canada-style trade agreement would have to include tougher provisions on state aid and other level-playing field matters.  Referees: all trade agreements include a dispute mechanism in case one party or another is believed to be backsliding on their obligations. As far as the EU is concerned, that means a role for the European Court of Justice. But at the British end, the government wants to take the UK out of the domestic reach of the ECJ.  In most trade talks, particularly between the regional hegemon and their near-neighbours, these disputes end one way: the bigger country or bloc gets 90 per cent of what it wants and the smaller one gets 10 per cent. You can see the landing zone for such a deal - on referees, one in which the ECJ has no purchase in domestic legislation but it is in practice the ultimate arbiter in all trades disputes, and one in which the UK, which in any case has historically and in the present doesn't even use all of the freedoms it has as an EU member on state aid signs away powers that it has little appetite to exercise as far as the level playing field goes.  But there's a big reason why that might not happen this time: frankly, what tends to force those compromises is the scale of the prize on offer. Because the UK is explicitly aiming, as that written ministerial statement puts it, to be outside the customs union and outside the single market by the end of the year, the economic cost of a free trade agreement on the terms envisaged by both sides is not a great deal smaller than the economic cost of an exit on WTO terms. The incentive to blink at the British end is considerably smaller than it was last year. Just because both sides are starting far closer together than they did the last phase doesn't necessarily mean that it will have the same ending".

I think that is a decent assesment, and explains why no deal planning continues.

[ajthefox]

20 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

There's not a chance of any ban moving forwards when the new Corsa e costs over 30 grand, close to 35 grand in fact.  And Bojo can forget trying to force the Nissan Leaf onto people as a viable alternative.

 

 

What's really needed is serious investment in our public transport networks, including cycling, across the country (and not just to make everyone's journey to London quicker).

 

 

[Guest MattP]

I think it was @Swan Lesta who said it first but Diane Abbott looks very unwell. To the point where even I'm concerned about her.

 

With her son's upcoming court cases and the fact she's a goner from the shadow cabinet anyway soon surely she should be taken off the front bench?

 

 

[WigstonWanderer]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I am not sure you can call QT proper scrutiny to be honest.  Its a soundbite shouting fest which doesn't allo any development of the argument.

 

The media needs to evolve to be able to call on experts (not the man in the street ffs) to decipher and fact check what is being said.  So instead of ignoring Boris' Brexit statement they should show it and then critique it.  Not just ignore it in the hope that everyone doesn't watch it on Youtube / Twitter and take it at face value.  That helps no one.

Unfortunately this seems to be just one aspect of a more worrying picture. I think with Cummings involved the press will be treated like dogs. Only the good, obedient ones will get a bone.

 

When I first arrived in Australia, one of the things that struck me was that politicians rarely seemed to be held to account in the media. In the UK, a news investigation programme will would often finish with an interview with the minister in charge, and I noticed that this rarely seemed to happen here. I’d say that’s what will now happen (and is already happening) under this arrogant bunch, and I believe it to be a great loss. I would say the same if it were Labour doing the same thing.

 

Unfortunately once this tradition is lost, it will become the new normal.

Edited 4 February 2020 by WigstonWanderer

[Guest MattP]

6 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Unfortunately this seems to be just one aspect of a more worrying picture. I think with Cummings involved the press will be treated like dogs. Only the good, obedient ones will get a bone.

 

When I first arrived in Australia, one of the things that struck me was that politicians rarely seemed to be held to account in the media. In the UK, a news investigation programme will would often finish with an interview with the minister in charge, and I noticed that this rarely seemed to happen here. I’d say that’s what will now happen (and is already happening) under this arrogant bunch, and I believe it to be a great loss. I would say the same if it were Labour doing the same thing.

 

Unfortunately once this tradition is lost, it will become the new normal.

God knows what he actually had planned, thankfully we'll never know.

 

 

[Strokes]

36 minutes ago, MattP said:

God knows what he actually had planned, thankfully we'll never know.

 

 

Fake news.

That didn’t really happen, it was dubbed and doesn’t even sound like him. He was there but definitely did not participate, it’s a MSM conspiracy.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-51369780

 

Sigh.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-51369780

 

Sigh.

Twinning Association members will be on a flight to France ASAP to restore relations I’m sure.  While it was painted over the villagers probably couldn’t name the twinned towns...

[Mike Oxlong]

6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I am not sure you can call QT proper scrutiny to be honest.  Its a soundbite shouting fest which doesn't allo any development of the argument.

 

The media needs to evolve to be able to call on experts (not the man in the street ffs) to decipher and fact check what is being said.  So instead of ignoring Boris' Brexit statement they should show it and then critique it.  Not just ignore it in the hope that everyone doesn't watch it on Youtube / Twitter and take it at face value.  That helps no one.

The Conservatives repeatedly “declined invitations” to go on Newsnight during the course of the election campaign as they knew that the likes of Emma Barnett would rip them more than one new arsehole. And then there was the Andrew Neill swerve.

 

Made sense though as Boris and Co were easy targets for any effective political interviewer and would more likely have come out of such exchanges smelling of shit rather than roses. 

 

Consequently, it was tactically astute to minimise scrutiny when they had such a big lead in the polls but their approach really emphasised the poor options available to the electorate across the board. 

 

Sad indeed if the selective involvement with the media continues. A government that functions as it should would surely view open and full media access as an opportunity to present and showcase its policies  .... unless of course those policies weren’t actually all that good. 

 

 

[leicsmac]

7 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Twinning Association members will be on a flight to France ASAP to restore relations I’m sure.  While it was painted over the villagers probably couldn’t name the twinned towns...

Not entirely sure that's the point...the symbolism of someone doing this is reasonably obvious.

 

But then as you said before, this kind of change always brings out the fvckwits.

[koop.]

On 14/12/2019 at 20:13, The Guvnor said:

What a rollercoaster of a ride it has been to finally get to the point where we will be leaving the EU and hallelujah to that.

Never bought into the mantra that the EU want to punish us to prevent further absconders, why would they need to when the EU is such a wonderful club?

A large majority was needed for Boris and thankfully achieved and will be crucial in obtaining a good deal, one which keeps a good relationship with the EU but gives us a level of self regulation for our own trade deals also control with immigration, fishing, law and money.

We need to be tough with our negotiations , the EU are aware of the make up now of the Tories that there will be no blocking or fcukaboutery tactics anymore.

I am probably in the minority on here but  I have real optimism that a decent deal will be done by the end of 2020. 

Couldn't agree more

[Sly]

Some people don’t get being out of the EU, is different to not going in Europe. 
 

I had to explain it to someone yesterday, using the example of Canada or Mexico not being in the USA.

[Jon the Hat]

14 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

The Conservatives repeatedly “declined invitations” to go on Newsnight during the course of the election campaign as they knew that the likes of Emma Barnett would rip them more than one new arsehole. And then there was the Andrew Neill swerve.

 

Made sense though as Boris and Co were easy targets for any effective political interviewer and would more likely have come out of such exchanges smelling of shit rather than roses. 

 

Consequently, it was tactically astute to minimise scrutiny when they had such a big lead in the polls but their approach really emphasised the poor options available to the electorate across the board. 

 

Sad indeed if the selective involvement with the media continues. A government that functions as it should would surely view open and full media access as an opportunity to present and showcase its policies  .... unless of course those policies weren’t actually all that good. 

 

The power struggle is that if going on these shows makes things worse for the party / government / minister in question, then why would they do it?  The media needs to allow them to actually explain what they are doing, which frankly they are doing a poor job of.