swampgas wrote: » But that potential economic success must be terrifying for the DUP. A scenario where NI is successful with a border in the Irish sea, with NI closely aligned with their old enemy across the border, combined with a GB economy likely sunk into recession, would mean that cooperation with Ireland and the EU would be a much more attractive option for many in NI than sticking with Westminster. Their supporters might start to think the unthinkable, and start to consider whether a united Ireland is really such a bad idea. Given an existential threat like that, the DUP's attitude is quite predictable. They must feel like they are looking into the abyss.
McGiver wrote: » Jeremy Corbyn: Whilst I agree with the Labour policy in general and agree that UK faces huge issues, I maintain he's an idiot and/or a liar - if they crash out there's no way they can fund the 'radical rebuild programme'. None. Zero. And also no time as all focus will be in firefighting.
briany wrote: » Hang on - if a load of UK businesses set up in backstopped NI in order to maintain unhindered trade with the EU, the tax money they generate would go back into the UK treasury and therefore mitigate the economic damage that a no-deal might have otherwise caused on the mainland. It would also make NI the darling of the UK, all of a sudden, instead of the red-headed stepchild.
I don't think the DUP are thinking long-term on this. They're only concern is playing to their base. But in that they're failing to recognise that the potential economic disaster of a no-deal for the whole of the UK is probably more fertile ground for a border poll.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Corbyn is so bad it would make you cry with frustration. He's locked in his own ideological bubble and can't see the opportunity for Labour that Brexit is bringing.
Stop moaning ffs wrote: » It was a campaign speech start to finish. He said he would do whatever it takes to stop no deal brexit. Except step down and hand the reigns over to literally anyone else who would easily kick the Tories into touch in the election.
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » I still don't see that turning to full-on revoke/remain/2ndRef gets Labour elected (much as I'd personally approve of that policy). It might well increase their vote by a good few percentage points, but hell they don't need any more votes in London or Manchester or Liverpool. But it would cost them votes in marginals in the Midlands, and xyz-On-Sea constituencies on every coast, places they need to win.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Well, pro-Remain vote numbers have increased according to the polls so that would be a factor in deciding their stance on Brexit when assessing constituencies. As important is that Corbyn will be debating/interviewed on television as will Johnson. Only one winner there when it comes to charisma.
Tell me how wrote: » I'm genuinely unsure who you are talking about here. Corbyn is nearly a caricature at this point and Johnson can appear like a blustering dishevelled city type. Neither have them have genuine charisma no matter how much their planted supporters will stomp and holler.
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » I think the key thing there is 'assessing constituencies', and exactly where the remain vote has increased. I'm no expert on constituencies. But obviously Labour get no seats in N Ireland, and are at best underdog in Scotland overall, and Wales is always very split. So if Labour are to get an overall majority then they probably need 55%-58% of the seats in England. So does a revoke/remain/2ndRef policy actually help with that. Or is the increase in remain in the polls centred on London/Manc/LPool. If some safe Labour constituency that voted 60% remain is now 65% remain then there is no point in chasing that vote - you already have that seat won. It's tricky, and obviously they have analysts who do this for them. But I think we can pay too much attention to poll figures when because of fptp only about 20% of votes are meaningful.
Peregrinus wrote: » Just to be clear, you travelling on a (non-CTA) EU passport when you arrived in Ireland (from outside the CTA) and your passport was scanned? (Not doubting you; just want to make sure I have correctly understood you.)
Peregrinus wrote: » In a no-deal Brexit, might data-sharing between the Irish and UK authorities have to cease because the UK will no longer be committed to EU data protection standards? And could this cause problems for the operation of the CTA?
54&56 wrote: » Where is Keir Starmer? Haven't heard or seen him in months.
prawnsambo wrote: » Interesting article by Alex Andreou about the dangers of intersecting post brexit problems and what effect they may have. As an example, the effect of delays on the road haulage industry. Would haulage companies stop transport to the UK because delays would eat up their entire (very slim) profit margins?
Professor Moriarty wrote: » In the latest Approval Rating poll: Johnson 40% approval. Net approval rating of +6% Corbyn: 20% approval. Net approval rating of -40% In a two horse race, Johnson hammers Corbyn.
Tell me how wrote: » Agreed. As it stands. But will Corbyn still be on 40% if EU have left him with egg on his face?
Quin_Dub wrote: » The implications are widespread. If trucks (and containers) are taking longer to complete the routes involving the UK because of customs delays it has knock-on impacts across the boards. I don't have specifics numbers , but imagine for example that a Truck or container is now able to do 10% less shipments each week/month because of the extra delays caused by No-deal Brexit. Are there enough physical Trucks and Containers in operation to accommodate that loss of capacity and productivity?
prawnsambo wrote: » There are also tachograph implications. A lot of what enters the UK is driver accompanied RoRo because it's quick and cheap and there's the added benefit of return loads. But reach the end of the tachograph limit and you have to add either further waiting time or another driver. Costs really escalate then. And the return loads encounter the same problem.
ballsymchugh wrote: » Corbyn's own constituency voted more for the Lib Dems in the European elections than for Labour, so even safe Labour seats in remain areas are going to be targetted by the remain alliance unless the MP is 100% behind a second referendum. blocking a no deal brexit won't be enough.
A member of the public calling in to ask whether his European health insurance card will work after a disorderly exit does not require balance. He needs an answer. An insurance expert saying 'well, in the absence of a side deal being struck between now and then, the short answer is 'no'' need not be balanced by a pundit droning on over Skype about 'project fear'. This is not a contentious issue. It is a factual one. There is only one credible reading of it. The view of someone who has worked in the industry for thirty years is not equilibrant to the pundit who quickly Googled the issue in the green room. But on that day of BBC no-deal coverage, that's exactly what happened.
AbusesToilets wrote: » I can't understand why the Labour party hasn't turfed Corbyn out on his ear. He's worse than useless. Deliberately refusing to score an open goal. A perfect moment where service to the nation and political desires are coalescing and he's likely to squander the opportunity and condemn the country to ruin. Madness.
Stop moaning ffs wrote: » He’s a eurosceptic down to his bones though. Suits him fine to let the Tories do the dirty work under the delusion he’ll get to be pm afterwards. Never gonna happen of course.
