Red on Red, Labour implode

[ProfessorDavey]

If the next PM is a remainer then I'd would have thought that they would try and get a Brexit light deal.

EEA in other words.

Point is though - is there a mandate for the UK joining EEA - not sure there is and it would have the 'it's all about migration' Brexiters spitting blood.

[L.A.]

Whoever becomes PM I suspect he or she will appoint a minister for Brexit who is of the same view as to the preferred post-Brexit deal.

So I think that makes it very unlikely that May will appoint Gove - because although May wanted to remain, if we don't her key priority will be to retain access to the free market. Gove isn't of that view - he and Leadsom are rather sniffy about the benefits of the free market.

I think May will appoint someone to lead the negotiations who favours EEA membership.

Minister for Brexit will be a 'poisoned chalice' - it will be impossible to get the 'Dream Deal' that the Brexiteers fantasied about, therefore who better to put in than Gove. Let him do the best he can and go with that option, leaving Gove to take all the flack.

[ProfessorDavey]

Minister for Brexit will be a 'poisoned chalice' - it will be impossible to get the 'Dream Deal' that the Brexiteers fantasied about, therefore who better to put in than Gove. Let him do the best he can and go with that option, leaving Gove to take all the flack.

The PM will require the minister for Brexit to be negotiating on her terms, so they will need to agree which are the priority red-line areas (e.g. maintaining free market access, not having free movement) - the PM and minister for Brexit will be aligned on those view - I don't believe May and Gove are.

[jeremyp]

EEA in other words.

Point is though - is there a mandate for the UK joining EEA - not sure there is and it would have the 'it's all about migration' Brexiters spitting blood.

There is no mandate about any particular solution to the current situation. All we know is that a small majority of the people do not want the solution to involve us being members of the EU.

The more I think about this, the more I realise the current state of affairs is just crazy.

[L.A.]

The PM will require the minister for Brexit to be negotiating on her terms, so they will need to agree which are the priority red-line areas (e.g. maintaining free market access, not having free movement) - the PM and minister for Brexit will be aligned on those view - I don't believe May and Gove are.

Of course, and it is quite possible that negotiations will fail - again I say, who better than Gove - he was the one who claimed these things were going to be quite straightforward.

[ProfessorDavey]

Of course, and it is quite possible that negotiations will fail - again I say, who better than Gove - he was the one who claimed these things were going to be quite straightforward.

Thinking about this some more, there will need to be far more than just a Minister for Brexit, there will need to be a whole team.

Perhaps the smartest political move is to make this a kind of Brexit team of national unity, bringing in individuals from all the main parties. It would be hard not to agree to be involved in the most important decision in our lifetime's in the 'national interest'. Doing that would spread around the blame, make it much harder for the deal to become a party political football.

I also think it may be that the people brought in won't be those most closely involved in the referendum campaign - given the intensely polarising nature of the debate and the dishonesty then the key figures are going to be damaged goods - so no Johnson, no Gove, no Leadsom, no Farage, no Cameron, no Osborne, no Corbyn etc, etc. Also to bring in some of the more 'respected' elder statesmen might be good - those that command somewhat greater respect than the shrill whippersnappers. And including a number in the Lords so who aren't going to be worried about getting kicked out at the next election.

So here's a punt in the dark

Minister for Brexit - William Hague
Ministerial team
Michael Howard
Alan Johnson
Frank Field
Paddy Ashdown
Duncan Carswell
Alex Salmond
Caroline Lucas

Just a thought

[Nearly Sane]

Thinking about this some more, there will need to be far more than just a Minister for Brexit, there will need to be a whole team.

Perhaps the smartest political move is to make this a kind of Brexit team of national unity, bringing in individuals from all the main parties. It would be hard not to agree to be involved in the most important decision in our lifetime's in the 'national interest'. Doing that would spread around the blame, make it much harder for the deal to become a party political football.

I also think it may be that the people brought in won't be those most closely involved in the referendum campaign - given the intensely polarising nature of the debate and the dishonesty then the key figures are going to be damaged goods - so no Johnson, no Gove, no Leadsom, no Farage, no Cameron, no Osborne, no Corbyn etc, etc. Also to bring in some of the more 'respected' elder statesmen might be good - those that command somewhat greater respect than the shrill whippersnappers. And including a number in the Lords so who aren't going to be worried about getting kicked out at the next election.

So here's a punt in the dark

Minister for Brexit - William Hague
Ministerial team
Michael Howard
Alan Johnson
Frank Field
Paddy Ashdown
Duncan Carswell
Alex Salmond
Caroline Lucas

Just a thought

Surely you need someone with experience in such matters like Roy Hodgson?

[ProfessorDavey]

Surely you need someone with experience in such matters like Roy Hodgson?

- blimey, has he been elevated to the House of Lords?

[Harrowby Hall]

You want less universities now?

D minus for use of English. Learn the difference between "less" and "fewer".

What I want is a sufficient number of appropriate institutions which can be used to develop the diverse skills needed for the United Kingdom to be a successful player in the modern world. This will require a range of educational and training institutions and not the imposition of a single model.

[ProfessorDavey]

D minus for use of English. Learn the difference between "less" and "fewer".

What I want is a sufficient number of appropriate institutions which can be used to develop the diverse skills needed for the United Kingdom to be a successful player in the modern world. This will require a range of educational and training institutions and not the imposition of a single model.

Problem is that the only terms people want to accept are 'university' and 'degree', hence if you haven't got a degree and didn't go to a university you aren't worth a bean.

So guess what is happening now - the government is throwing money at universities to set up ... degree apprenticeships. Not enough money by the way to cover the employers' apprenticeship levy.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Harrowby,

Please leave Jakswan alone, the poor sod is suffering from "Brexit" symptoms, a overwhelming feeling of "oh fuck what have I just done".

A common ailment at the moment, closely related to the ailment "Remain" symptoms, a overwhelming feeling of "oh fuck what have they just done".

Gonnagle.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Dear Harrowby,

Please leave Jakswan alone, the poor sod is suffering from "Brexit" symptoms, a overwhelming feeling of "oh fuck what have I just done".

A common ailment at the moment, closely related to the ailment "Remain" symptoms, a overwhelming feeling of "oh fuck what have they just done".

Gonnagle.

You mean Jack has developed ''Bricksit''?

[Jack Knave]

EEA in other words.

Point is though - is there a mandate for the UK joining EEA - not sure there is and it would have the 'it's all about migration' Brexiters spitting blood.

This is the problem, leave was the vote. But some say a fudge will be done by getting a mandate from a early GE. This will mean some will go on a stay in manifesto (assuming Art 50 hasn't been triggered), other on the EEA type choice and some on a full out leave agenda.

[Jack Knave]

Minister for Brexit will be a 'poisoned chalice' - it will be impossible to get the 'Dream Deal' that the Brexiteers fantasied about, therefore who better to put in than Gove. Let him do the best he can and go with that option, leaving Gove to take all the flack.

The whole government will pay in 2020. Chances are they'll get a halfway house and please no one.

[ProfessorDavey]

This is the problem, leave was the vote. But some say a fudge will be done by getting a mandate from a early GE. This will mean some will go on a stay in manifesto (assuming Art 50 hasn't been triggered), other on the EEA type choice and some on a full out leave agenda.

But EEA is just as much 'leaving the EU' (which was the vote) as any other kind of settlement outside the EU. Clearly one you don't like, but there are other Brexiters who couldn't abide an isolationist WTO type approach with restrictions on freedom of movement.

So that's the crux of your problem - you all agree on what you are against (being a member of the EU) but you don't agree with what you are for.

[jakswan]

D minus for use of English. Learn the difference between "less" and "fewer".

What I want is a sufficient number of appropriate institutions which can be used to develop the diverse skills needed for the United Kingdom to be a successful player in the modern world. This will require a range of educational and training institutions and not the imposition of a single model.

E for comprehension I was replying to Gonzo not you. If you want to start a topic on further education then feel free, I was exploring the Mother Love, Apple Pie thinking of the hard left.

[jakswan]

Please leave Jakswan alone, the poor sod is suffering from "Brexit" symptoms, a overwhelming feeling of "oh fuck what have I just done".

More patronising claptrap, get a grip!

[Bubbles]

Thinking about this some more, there will need to be far more than just a Minister for Brexit, there will need to be a whole team.

Perhaps the smartest political move is to make this a kind of Brexit team of national unity, bringing in individuals from all the main parties. It would be hard not to agree to be involved in the most important decision in our lifetime's in the 'national interest'. Doing that would spread around the blame, make it much harder for the deal to become a party political football.

I also think it may be that the people brought in won't be those most closely involved in the referendum campaign - given the intensely polarising nature of the debate and the dishonesty then the key figures are going to be damaged goods - so no Johnson, no Gove, no Leadsom, no Farage, no Cameron, no Osborne, no Corbyn etc, etc. Also to bring in some of the more 'respected' elder statesmen might be good - those that command somewhat greater respect than the shrill whippersnappers. And including a number in the Lords so who aren't going to be worried about getting kicked out at the next election.

So here's a punt in the dark

Minister for Brexit - William Hague
Ministerial team
Michael Howard
Alan Johnson
Frank Field
Paddy Ashdown
Duncan Carswell
Alex Salmond
Caroline Lucas

Just a thought

I think you have an interesting idea there.

It would free up the Government to run the country and they would report to the gov and be guided by them.

Good career move for Alex Salmond   

Paddy Ashdown, he must be ancient by now.

[Brownie]

Ancient he is but gorgeous as ever.
(Morning Rose btw)

[Jack Knave]

But EEA is just as much 'leaving the EU' (which was the vote) as any other kind of settlement outside the EU. Clearly one you don't like, but there are other Brexiters who couldn't abide an isolationist WTO type approach with restrictions on freedom of movement.

So that's the crux of your problem - you all agree on what you are against (being a member of the EU) but you don't agree with what you are for.

The EEA status is not leaving the EU. You are still associated with it in some manner. Leave means leave, and total divorce from the EU's political project.

I have no problems as regards this as a remain vote would have been fine by me because the EU is breaking up from within and a substantial number of the peoples of Europe are fed up with it.

What the Leave result has done, even if it doesn't get us fully out, is to inspire other referendums on the EU with the EU membership. People in France and the Netherlands are calling for one and the Austrian Presidential elections are going to be re-run and Hofer of the Freedom Party will be offering one in his manifesto, and the Austrian people are fed up with the immigration problem. Portugal's socialist party coalition is push back against Brussels austerity requirements and Spain looks to be having a socialist party coalition as well. So things are looking up....   

[Jack Knave]

Getting back to the topic of the thread, Corbyn is looking more and more like that old guy from the Popular Front who was sitting on his own........"Splitter!!!"

[ProfessorDavey]

The EEA status is not leaving the EU.

Yes it is - Norway are members of the EEA, they are not a member of the EU.

Being like Norway is clearly Brexit and absolutely consistent with the referendum question which asked whether we should remain a member of the EU or leave the EU.

You might not like it, but it is absolutely a completely valid version of Brexit - we would no longer be a member of the EU.

Problem for you, and Brexit in general is that as much as you might hate the notion of EEA membership, there are other Brexiters who hate your notion of Brexit.

It is now time for Brexiters to agree what they are for, not what they are against. And you won't find 52% in favour of any one version of Brexit, nor 48% or anything like it.

[L.A.]

Getting back to the topic of the thread, Corbyn is looking more and more like that old guy from the Popular Front who was sitting on his own........"Splitter!!!"

Corbyn is the spectre leading Labour into total oblivion,  who knows what will  replace them!

[Jack Knave]

Yes it is - Norway are members of the EEA, they are not a member of the EU.

Being like Norway is clearly Brexit and absolutely consistent with the referendum question which asked whether we should remain a member of the EU or leave the EU.

You might not like it, but it is absolutely a completely valid version of Brexit - we would no longer be a member of the EU.

Problem for you, and Brexit in general is that as much as you might hate the notion of EEA membership, there are other Brexiters who hate your notion of Brexit.

It is now time for Brexiters to agree what they are for, not what they are against. And you won't find 52% in favour of any one version of Brexit, nor 48% or anything like it.

But the EEA is subject to the political machinations of the EU and so is not Brexit i.e. they lack control of some of their policies like immigration control. Brexit was about taking back control and therefore means a total severing of the political ties with the EU/Brussels.

You seem to have failed to have notice that what happens next isn't subject to the Brexiteers, and their wishes, but how the Conservative party handle things.

[jakswan]

Yes it is - Norway are members of the EEA, they are not a member of the EU.

Being like Norway is clearly Brexit and absolutely consistent with the referendum question which asked whether we should remain a member of the EU or leave the EU.

You might not like it, but it is absolutely a completely valid version of Brexit - we would no longer be a member of the EU.

Wow I agree so far with Davey, must go for a lie down.

Problem for you, and Brexit in general is that as much as you might hate the notion of EEA membership, there are other Brexiters who hate your notion of Brexit.

Hate is a strong word think we need get away from that sort of language. There are different opinions, on all sides, there would have been many versions of remain.

It is now time for Brexiters to agree what they are for, not what they are against. And you won't find 52% in favour of any one version of Brexit, nor 48% or anything like it.

Its time for the Parliamentary parties to decide and up-to us to decide to support them.