May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[aright]

 

3 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

So the SNP go from having a pretty unsustainable 95% of the Scottish MPs in Westminster to having a very reasonable 59% and you suggest that this is failure, but in your very next paragraph you suggest that Weak & Wobbly's utterly dismal 2017 transition from a strong majority to being held hostage by a group of God bothering, terrorist backing creationists is somehow a show of strength? Brexit logic in no more than a few lines.

Yes to go from 95% to 59% is a failure. What would you call it a success? You could hardly call it holding your ground.

To add to the statistics the SNP got 37% of the popular vote while the Tories got 29% and Labour 27%. I would hardly call that a massive endorsement of the SNP.

I would concede that some people turned away from the SNP not only for not wanting another referendum reasons but because of the SNP's appalling record on schools.

 

I never said Mrs May's June result was a show of strength I just asked you to remind us who the PM is.

 

"being held hostage by a group of God bothering, terrorist backing creationists is somehow a show of strength?"

This is just not worth commenting on.

 

This is however! A question you seem to have overlooked from my previous post

If Nicola Sturgeon feels she can win what was a planned independence referendum, which you claim has high 40's popularity without a campaign, why has she put her plans on hold? It wouldn't have anything to do with the feeling she couldn't win it would it?

 

[dick dasterdly]

4 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Thank you, that link worked.

 

Personally, I've no time for govt./county contractors as I know they somehow get away with charging way more than the 'market' .  But this is off-topic.

 

Even so I come back to the fact that it's ridiculous to blame brexit (that hasn't happened) for some companies destruction....  They clearly had other problems.

I suspect Orac, we could 'swap stories' about govt. and county contractors .

Edited January 15, 2018 by dick dasterdly

[evadgib]

Scotland's economy could be £12.7bn a year worse off under a so-called hard Brexit, according to analysis by the Scottish government.

The figure is contained in a paper on the impact of UK withdrawal from the European Union, to be published later.

It calculates the cost to Scotland of the UK leaving the single market with or without a trade deal.

The UK government insists it is seeking a Brexit deal that will work for the whole of the UK.

The Scottish government document, titled Scotland's Place in Europe: People, Jobs and Investment, considers three potential outcomes for Scotland's economy when Britain exits the EU in March 2019.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-42682253

 

I have commented elsewhere to the effect that spooks, foreign govts or 3rd parties with an interest in re-railing Brexit are going overboard peddling disinformation via social media & this is a classic example...

Edited January 15, 2018 by evadgib

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, aright said:

Yes to go from 95% to 59% is a failure. What would you call it a success? You could hardly call it holding your ground.

To add to the statistics the SNP got 37% of the popular vote while the Tories got 29% and Labour 27%. I would hardly call that a massive endorsement of the SNP.

I would concede that some people turned away from the SNP not only for not wanting another referendum reasons but because of the SNP's appalling record on schools.

 

I never said Mrs May's June result was a show of strength I just asked you to remind us who the PM is.

While you may be happy to stew in your contradictory stance, I will continue to contend that you cannot have it both ways - the SNP has 59% of Scottish MPs. Spin it any way you like but that is a success. As for TM, she is a busted flush. The only reason she is still there is because of a long line of concessions. She even allows herself to be bullied by her own cabinet.

 

As for Scottish schools - you should broaden your scope beyond what the unionist papers are telling you. Besides, this month it is the SNHS that is the talking point. You are out of date.

 

1 hour ago, aright said:

"being held hostage by a group of God bothering, terrorist backing creationists is somehow a show of strength?"

This is just not worth commenting on.

In what way is it not worth commenting upon? My description of the DUP is wholly accurate, and my use of their propping up TM being an example of how catastrophically weak she actually is, is valid.

 

1 hour ago, aright said:

This is however! A question you seem to have overlooked from my previous post

If Nicola Sturgeon feels she can win what was a planned independence referendum, which you claim has high 40's popularity without a campaign, why has she put her plans on hold? It wouldn't have anything to do with the feeling she couldn't win it would it?

Your guess is as good as mine - I suspect she is waiting for the inevitable disaster that will accompany whatever deal DD manages to end up with in order to underline the cause for those soft remainer unionists.

 

[simoh1490]

2 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

The lessons that will be learned from the demise of Carillion will be very little to do with brexit, and nearly everything to do with how a large PLC shouldn't behave when it becomes a major business partner of the government.

Just like Mitie and Capita, who have issued Brexit related profit warnings, should have learned how to run their businesses better I suppose! Post 13168 Guardian link confirms.

[aright]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

While you may be happy to stew in your contradictory stance, I will continue to contend that you cannot have it both ways - the SNP has 59% of Scottish MPs. Spin it any way you like but that is a success. As for TM, she is a busted flush. The only reason she is still there is because of a long line of concessions. She even allows herself to be bullied by her own cabinet.

 

Your guess is as good as mine - I suspect she is waiting for the inevitable disaster that will accompany whatever deal DD manages to end up with in order to underline the cause for those soft remainer unionists.

 

I think its being more a case of you stewing in denial using the ploy sometimes the best way to solve a problem is to deny one exists. Perhaps you were watching a different channel on election night to me. I can remember the whoops of delight when the results were announced for the Conservatives and Labour  but I don't recall joy and champagne when the SNP had your so called success. I remember some speculation that Nicola Sturgeon might have to stand down as a result of the result. I can also remember her saying "It is an inescapable fact we suffered bitterly disappointing results last night."  You can hardly translate that into we had a successful night didn't we.  I don't defend Mrs May but I do admire her and remind you she was given 6 weeks to live by some last June and after 7 months she is still there.  

 

If  your contention is correct that the leaving the union vote is already high without a campaign any sensible politician would seize the moment. I think my guess is better than yours , she didn't think she could win it.

That's it I have no more to give but please have the last word. Cheers!

[Orac]

I think its being more a case of you stewing in denial using the ploy sometimes the best way to solve a problem is to deny one exists. Perhaps you were watching a different channel on election night to me. I can remember the whoops of delight when the results were announced for the Conservatives and Labour  but I don't recall joy and champagne when the SNP had your so called success. I remember some speculation that Nicola Sturgeon might have to stand down as a result of the result. I can also remember her saying "It is an inescapable fact we suffered bitterly disappointing results last night."  You can hardly translate that into we had a successful night didn't we.  I don't defend Mrs May but I do admire her and remind you she was given 6 weeks to live by some last June and after 7 months she is still there.  
 
If  your contention is correct that the leaving the union vote is already high without a campaign any sensible politician would seize the moment. I think my guess is better than yours , she didn't think she could win it.
That's it I have no more to give but please have the last word. Cheers!

“whoops of joy” from the Conservatives - are you sure you got the right election?

The BBC described TM as looking “heavily made up as if she had been in tears” - around the 3.30 mark

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[aright]

6 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

 

“whoops of joy” from the Conservatives - are you sure you got the right election?

The BBC described TM as looking “heavily made up as if she had been in tears” - around the 3.30 mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

We were talking about Scotland not England

The Conservatives gained significantly in Scotland

Edited January 15, 2018 by aright

[RuamRudy]

21 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

 

“whoops of joy” from the Conservatives - are you sure you got the right election?

The BBC described TM as looking “heavily made up as if she had been in tears” - around the 3.30 mark

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 Aright is correct that the Tories and Labour whooped with delight, the two parties having worked hand in hand across Scotland to unseat the SNP where they could.

[RuamRudy]

18 minutes ago, aright said:

We were talking about Scotland not England

The Conservatives gained significantly in Scotland

Correct - a 13 fold improvement. It will be interesting to see if they ever do become relevant again in Scottish politics.

[billd766]

5 hours ago, evadgib said:

Scotland's economy could be £12.7bn a year worse off under a so-called hard Brexit, according to analysis by the Scottish government.

The figure is contained in a paper on the impact of UK withdrawal from the European Union, to be published later.

It calculates the cost to Scotland of the UK leaving the single market with or without a trade deal.

The UK government insists it is seeking a Brexit deal that will work for the whole of the UK.

The Scottish government document, titled Scotland's Place in Europe: People, Jobs and Investment, considers three potential outcomes for Scotland's economy when Britain exits the EU in March 2019.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-42682253

 

I have commented elsewhere to the effect that spooks, foreign govts or 3rd parties with an interest in re-railing Brexit are going overboard peddling disinformation via social media & this is a classic example...

 

quote "Scotland's economy could be £12.7bn a year worse off under a so-called hard Brexit, according to analysis by the Scottish government."

 

And the most important words in that statement are "could be".

 

Not will be. not definitely or anything else, simply "could be".

 

It "could be" more, it "could be" less, it could be nothing at all. Nobody has any real idea yet but Nicola Sturgeon, who has been very quiet lately actually said that there were 3 options so she gave the worst.

 

More scaremongering and disinformation from her government once again in yet another attempt to derail Brexit.

[billd766]

6 hours ago, evadgib said:

 

 

Double post.

 

It was the dreaded 21.20 every night shutdown by TVF that caught me out.

 

I wonder if they will ever get around to fixing it? 

 

 

Edited January 15, 2018 by billd766

[Scott]

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

Double post.

 

It was the dreaded 21.20 every night shutdown by TVF that caught me out.

 

I wonder if they will ever get around to fixing it? 

 

 

It's been reported many times, but will be reported on your behalf again.   They won't listen to me -- maybe they will listen to you!

 

[RuamRudy]

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

quote "Scotland's economy could be £12.7bn a year worse off under a so-called hard Brexit, according to analysis by the Scottish government."

 

And the most important words in that statement are "could be".

 

Not will be. not definitely or anything else, simply "could be".

 

It "could be" more, it "could be" less, it could be nothing at all. Nobody has any real idea yet but Nicola Sturgeon, who has been very quiet lately actually said that there were 3 options so she gave the worst.

 

More scaremongering and disinformation from her government once again in yet another attempt to derail Brexit.

The big difference between the Scottish government and Westminster, of course, is that the former have actually carried out an assessment of the extent of the harm that Brexit is going to do to the economy. 

[aright]

33 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

The big difference between the Scottish government and Westminster, of course, is that the former have actually carried out an assessment of the extent of the harm that Brexit is going to do to the economy. 

What independent assessment was that then?

It was my understanding that the Scottish Government received a redacted version of the impact of leaving the EU compiled by Westminster.

Did they do there own study?

[Khun Han]

8 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

Just like Mitie and Capita, who have issued Brexit related profit warnings, should have learned how to run their businesses better I suppose! Post 13168 Guardian link confirms.

 

My company has worked for both Mitie and Carillion in the past on construction projects. Our experiences of the site workers of both companies is that they were uniformly bone idle. As an aside, both companies were also bad payers. Didn't know much about Capita, but their Wiki tells me that they were sacked from several NHS Trust contracts back in 2014 due to terrible performance, which indicates that their biggest problems pre-date brexit and are not related to it.

[simoh1490]

23 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

My company has worked for both Mitie and Carillion in the past on construction projects. Our experiences of the site workers of both companies is that they were uniformly bone idle. As an aside, both companies were also bad payers. Didn't know much about Capita, but their Wiki tells me that they were sacked from several NHS Trust contracts back in 2014 due to terrible performance, which indicates that their biggest problems pre-date brexit and are not related to it.

You missed the point entirely and that was the volume of work coming from government to these companies which is now drying up as a result of Brexit, including the work at several NHS TRusts - that supply pipe of jobs just got mad much much smaller which is why UK companies are now going to the wall, in spectacular fashion I might add.

[Khun Han]

16 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

You missed the point entirely and that was the volume of work coming from government to these companies which is now drying up as a result of Brexit, including the work at several NHS TRusts - that supply pipe of jobs just got mad much much smaller which is why UK companies are now going to the wall, in spectacular fashion I might add.

 

The work coming from the government to Carillion had not dried up. Their financial woes were mainly down to making losses on their big construction projects (hardly surprising, considering how badly their sites were run). And Capita's lack of government contracts is, as I pointed out, due to their appalling performance long before brexit was on the agenda.

[aright]

1 hour ago, simoh1490 said:

You missed the point entirely and that was the volume of work coming from government to these companies which is now drying up as a result of Brexit, including the work at several NHS TRusts - that supply pipe of jobs just got mad much much smaller which is why UK companies are now going to the wall, in spectacular fashion I might add.

On the contrary work for Carillion has not been drying up since Brexit.

"It has been in crisis mode since last July when a shock profit warning knocked 90pc off its share price. But in the months since it has been handed billions of pounds worth of contracts to build schools and railways and manage Ministry of Defence properties."

There  is no doubt supply side companies will suffer as a result of Carillions position, but it has nothing to do with Brexit.

 

[SheungWan]

9 hours ago, aright said:

What independent assessment was that then?

It was my understanding that the Scottish Government received a redacted version of the impact of leaving the EU compiled by Westminster.

Did they do there own study?

Your 'understanding': Is that the one where David Davis finally admitted to the House of Commons in December that the UK had done no systematic impact assessment on Brexit affecting different sectors of the UK economy after having indicated that work had been undertaken?

[RuamRudy]

10 hours ago, aright said:

What independent assessment was that then?

It was my understanding that the Scottish Government received a redacted version of the impact of leaving the EU compiled by Westminster.

Did they do there own study?

If you will forgive my impertinence, your understanding seems to be on a level with the detail of analysis the UK government has completed for Brexit:

 

"Davis said there had been “no systematic impact assessment” of leaving the EU, having talked previously about such apparent studies existing “in excruciating detail”. "

The Scottish Government has, on the other hand, taken a proactive approach to the unwanted situation. It suggests such negative impact as:

 

"Leaving the EU could reduce Scottish tax revenues by between £1.7 billion and £3.7 billion a year by 2030."

 

 

[aright]

3 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

If you will forgive my impertinence, your understanding seems to be on a level with the detail of analysis the UK government has completed for Brexit:

 

"Davis said there had been “no systematic impact assessment” of leaving the EU, having talked previously about such apparent studies existing “in excruciating detail”. "

The Scottish Government has, on the other hand, taken a proactive approach to the unwanted situation. It suggests such negative impact as:

 

"Leaving the EU could reduce Scottish tax revenues by between £1.7 billion and £3.7 billion a year by 2030."

 

 

Fine . All I'm asking for is a link to the Scottish study.

[aright]

This is the study I am referring to . Didn't you read it?

 

HM Treasury analysis:

the immediate economic

impact of leaving the EU

Presented to Parliament by the

Chancellor of the Exchequer

by Command of Her Majesty

 

Foreword 3

Executive summary 5

Section 1 Uncertainty, disruption and costs of leaving the EU 11

Section 2 Macroeconomic analysis of the immediate impact of leaving the EU on the UK economy 35

Annex A Macroeconomic and fiscal modelling of the immediate impact of the UK leaving the EU 59

Annex B Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union 79

Glossary of key terms 80

List of tables 82

List of figures 82

List of charts 83

 

 

 

[RuamRudy]

2 hours ago, aright said:

Fine . All I'm asking for is a link to the Scottish study.

It's there, in my post - TV no longer indicates hyperlinks as underlined and blue, but simply makes them bold and black.

 

5 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

It suggests such negative impact as:

 

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, aright said:

This is the study I am referring to . Didn't you read it?

 

HM Treasury analysis:

the immediate economic

impact of leaving the EU

Presented to Parliament by the

Chancellor of the Exchequer

by Command of Her Majesty

 

Foreword 3

Executive summary 5

Section 1 Uncertainty, disruption and costs of leaving the EU 11

Section 2 Macroeconomic analysis of the immediate impact of leaving the EU on the UK economy 35

Annex A Macroeconomic and fiscal modelling of the immediate impact of the UK leaving the EU 59

Annex B Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union 79

Glossary of key terms 80

List of tables 82

List of figures 82

List of charts 83

 

 

 

Didn't realise you held George Osborne's views on brexit with such high regard.

[aright]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

It's there, in my post - TV no longer indicates hyperlinks as underlined and blue, but simply makes them bold and black.

 

 

So its conjecture then!

 

That aside I m sure todays article in the Telegraph will interest you. Interested in your view..

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/01/16/no-consensus-brexit-snp-drop-referendum-plan/

 

 

[aright]

5 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Didn't realise you held George Osborne's views on brexit with such high regard.

As a Chancellor I rated George highly. I just wish he had got along with Mrs May. I also didn't say I agreed with the report 

Edited January 16, 2018 by aright

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, aright said:

This is the study I am referring to . Didn't you read it?

 

HM Treasury analysis:

the immediate economic

impact of leaving the EU

 

You do realise that this was a Remainers' impact assessment, published before the vote, don't you?  Well, if you insist..

 

The government's assessment, from the report you cited, was:

 

"A vote to leave would cause a profound economic shock creating instability and uncertainty which would be compounded by the complex and interdependent negotiations that would follow. The central conclusion of the analysis is that the effect of this profound shock would be to push the UK into recession and lead to a sharp rise in unemployment."

 

Since this report, DD has talked about sector based impact assessments that went into 'excrutiating detail' however that appears to be a fabrication - they have prepared nothing of substance or value to try to predict the storms ahead.

[aright]

All I did was refer to a report I didn't say I agreed with it.

In fact when you think about it from your standpoint it was a very unconvincing report wasn't it because the country voted to leave.

 

Edited January 16, 2018 by aright

[RuamRudy]

22 minutes ago, aright said:

So its conjecture then!

The crystal ball was, unfortunately, not devolved, but retained by Westminster. Hobbled by the PM's refusal to give Scots fair access to the Oracle, conjecture is the next best thing.

 

22 minutes ago, aright said:

That aside I m sure todays article in the Telegraph will interest you. Interested in your view..

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/01/16/no-consensus-brexit-snp-drop-referendum-plan/

I can only see the first couple of paragraphs without having to register so I cannot comment on the meat of Cochrane's opinion piece but I am certain that it will follow his and the Telegraph's well trodden formula of trying to suggest that the SNP is in a muddle, that their figures don't add up and that Scots are much too canny not to realise that they are far better continuing to be behoven to the UK. Am I right?