Politics, politics, politics

[Gilzeantoscore]

Vinyl is one of life's luxury item worth owning/collecting. Hardback books (so not far off with manuscripts) too.

And if you are into globalisation then you've got to do it properly. Don't get boxed in by the EU to only buying from white people. Do trade your own personal trade with black, brown and yellow people too. Mercari (https://www.mercari.com/jp - a much better equivalent of ebay but based in Japan) is a particular favourite of mine

I don't want to know where you get your records, i want to know where you get your drugs?

 

[ShipOfTheseus]

But it means we are forced into permanent customs union, until Irish reunification anyway. If we agree to this deal, there's no way out of the CU - no article 50 equivalent, nothing.

I can see why leavers dislike the deal, certainly. I’m beginning to wonder if it’s a reasonable starting place for backing into EFTA and a robust, permanent association agreement. Still hoping for political chaos and A50 revocation, for the time being, though.

 

[SpurMeUp]

You are speaking from a reasoned, practical and logical viewpoint. But that is not how this will play out IMO because those viewpoints are not part of the palate on offer. If they were, the UK would have pulled the plug on Brexit a long time ago and gone a different way. What is good for the UK is not the primary argument amazingly.

The soft Brexit option, whatever its form, is the hardest to achieve because that is the one being negotiated. There is no consensus on the optimum outcome and so there is no agreed path to reach it. How can you plot a course to an unknown destination? This option will expend the remaining time in endless pontification and ultimately come up with nothing more than disagreement.

So if not this then what? The other two positions are either cop out or drop out and require no such negotiation, as so are more likely IMO.

Enjoy the spectacle. <popcorn>

Dispite appearances, we do have quite a few intelligent MPs, biz leaders, media people etc. So I reamain a tad more optimistic. No only would a sane leader stuggle to impose hard brexit, the establishment wouldn't let it happen. Which leaves a simple choice - soft brexit or remain. Remain being the better option, almost everyone agrees. Sadly for the UK this will take time to play out. While it does government, investment, uk growth is in stasis.

 

[the dza]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1063746585442623488

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Yeah, I'm still confident that, in the event of a general election/whatever happens after the deal gets voted down, the EU would want to negotiate and avoid a no-deal scenario.

Despite Merkell and the like explicitly stating otherwise? Despite it not even being in their interest considering they have us over a barrell now?

You are a true believer, it seems. I applaud your optimism, but honestly cannot agree.

I can see why leavers dislike the deal, certainly. I’m beginning to wonder if it’s a reasonable starting place for backing into EFTA and a robust, permanent association agreement. Still hoping for political chaos and A50 revocation, for the time being, though.

This is exactly what I expect at this point, has been for a while. Hard brexit simply isnt on the cards, they dont have the balls for it. So its soft or no brexit, at which point the decisions are simple.

 

[P.D.]

I don't see the DUP voting down the deal, they would surely prefer the deal to Corbyn having the potential opportunity to get into power. More likely they abstain at worst.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Mr Raab, who negotiated for the UK with the EU's Michel Barnier, has been explaining his decision to quit on the BBC's Andrew Marr show.

With "two or three points" being changed he could support the government's proposals, he said.

He said he did not know who had inserted a clause on customs relations into the future partnership document but said it was a "clear breach" of the Conservative manifesto.

"The difficulty for me is that I was being asked to go over to Brussels and sign on the bottom line... on a deal which I said in good conscience I did not feel was right for the country," he said.

"I do think we are being bullied, I do think we are being subjected to what is pretty close to blackmail frankly.

"I do think there is a point at which, we probably should have done it before, where we just say 'I'm sorry this is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, we cannot accept those dictated terms'."

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Labour leader Mr Corbyn says his party, which has 257 MPs, will not support the deal.

He told Ridge on Sunday the "one-way agreement" on Northern Ireland was "not acceptable", and there were no guarantees on workers' rights and environmental protections.

If it was voted down in the Commons, he said the government should go back to the EU and "renegotiate, rapidly".

Mr Corbyn insisted Labour would be able to negotiate a better deal, even within the time remaining before Brexit, saying the proposed transition period - which will only happen if there is a withdrawal agreement - offered "some opportunities" for this.

He also said another referendum - as demanded by some of his MPs - was "an option for the future but not an option for today".

He said he voted Remain in the 2016 referendum but if there were to be another, he said: "I don't know how I would vote - what the options would be at that time."

He also revealed that he had not yet read all of the 585 page draft EU withdrawal agreement.


He couldnt be less subtle in his desire to leave, could he?

 

[monkeybarry]

Mr Raab, who negotiated for the UK with the EU's Michel Barnier, has been explaining his decision to quit on the BBC's Andrew Marr show.

With "two or three points" being changed he could support the government's proposals, he said.

He said he did not know who had inserted a clause on customs relations into the future partnership document but said it was a "clear breach" of the Conservative manifesto.

"The difficulty for me is that I was being asked to go over to Brussels and sign on the bottom line... on a deal which I said in good conscience I did not feel was right for the country," he said.

"I do think we are being bullied, I do think we are being subjected to what is pretty close to blackmail frankly.

"I do think there is a point at which, we probably should have done it before, where we just say 'I'm sorry this is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, we cannot accept those dictated terms'."[/QUOTE]


This is the definitive analysis of Brexit.
Stage 1 - the lack of responsibility
Stage 2 - .The arrogance

I'm sure the contradiction in those two sentences was completely lost on Raab

 

[AuroRaman]

It’s our general arrogance and entitlement that’s made me squirm during this whole brick-show.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using Fapatalk

 

[Gutter Boy]

Labour leader Mr Corbyn says his party, which has 257 MPs, will not support the deal.

He told Ridge on Sunday the "one-way agreement" on Northern Ireland was "not acceptable", and there were no guarantees on workers' rights and environmental protections.

If it was voted down in the Commons, he said the government should go back to the EU and "renegotiate, rapidly".

Mr Corbyn insisted Labour would be able to negotiate a better deal, even within the time remaining before Brexit, saying the proposed transition period - which will only happen if there is a withdrawal agreement - offered "some opportunities" for this.

He also said another referendum - as demanded by some of his MPs - was "an option for the future but not an option for today".

He said he voted Remain in the 2016 referendum but if there were to be another, he said: "I don't know how I would vote - what the options would be at that time."

He also revealed that he had not yet read all of the 585 page draft EU withdrawal agreement.


He couldnt be less subtle in his desire to leave, could he?

I love Corbyn on Brexit. He's as moustache twiddlingly subtle as when dingdong Dastardly is being nice at the start of Wacky Racers

 

[Gutter Boy]

It’s our general arrogance and entitlement that’s made me squirm during this whole brick-show.

I completely disagree. We've been embarrassingly kowtowed and pathetic. We've negotiated like a peace agreement after we've lost a war. We're ending up paying reparation and giving them the Sudetenland. When all we needed to do was say so long, and hope you enjoyed all the fish.

 

[ShipOfTheseus]

It’s our general arrogance and entitlement that’s made me squirm during this whole brick-show.

Well, at least that's only the nutters on the Tory right, with their WWII obsession. It's not visible on the left, and it certainly hasn't infected this site.

I completely disagree. We've been embarrassingly kowtowed and pathetic. We've negotiated like a peace agreement after we've lost a war. We're ending up paying reparation and giving them the Sudetenland. When all we needed to do was say so long, and hope you enjoyed all the fish.

Oh. Er.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Despite Merkell and the like explicitly stating otherwise? Despite it not even being in their interest considering they have us over a barrell now?

.

Depends on how you read the statement -she has no interest in adding amendments to the current deal, they are at the end of the road with May. Could easily see them reconsidering as they will get more of what they want from a Labour Govt. They would prefer us in the EEA than this mess (IMO) so this is why they may enter into talks.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Something very interested that was reported last week but that might have been missed with all the May Brexit deal/No confidence hoo-hah:

=====

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...sidies-illegal-european-court-capacity-market

UK's backup power subsidies are illegal, European court rules

Surprise judgement means government must halt capacity market scheme

Adam Vaughan
@adamvaughan_uk
Thu 15 Nov 2018 12.59 GMTLast modified on Fri 16 Nov 2018 16.39 GMT


The capacity market scheme hands tens of millions of pounds a month to owners of coal and gas power stations. Photograph: Jon Bower/Alamy
The UK’s scheme for ensuring power supplies during the winter months has been suspended after a ruling by the European court of justice that it constitutes illegal state aid.

Payments to energy firms under the £1bn capacity market scheme will be halted until the government can win permission from the European commission to restart it.

The scheme subsidises owners of coal, gas and other power stations so the plants are ready to ensure that electricity for businesses and homes is available at peak times in winter.

The UK has also been blocked from holding any capacity market auctions for energy firms to bid for new contracts to supply backup power in the future. National Grid said ministers had instructed it to indefinitely postpone auctions that had been planned for early 2019.


The government said it was disappointed by the judgement but insisted that power supplies were not at risk.

On Thursday, the ECJ ruled that the European commission had failed to launch a proper investigation into the UK’s capacity market when it cleared the scheme for state aid approval in 2014.

The ruling renders the capacity market unlawful for a “standstill period” while ministers seek state aid approval from the European commission. It is not clear how long that will take, but it could be many months.

The court’s surprise judgement was an embarrassment for Greg Clark, the business secretary, who hours later outlined his vision for the future of the power market to energy executives at an event in London.

Industry watchers said the decision would send shockwaves throughout the sector.

“The consequences are absolutely huge. Immediate cessation of payments is going to have immediate consequences for electricity generators that were relying on them,” said Ed Reed, head of research at analysts Cornwall Insight.

While electricity supplies were unlikely to be at risk, he added, companies may seek to recoup lost capacity market revenues through wholesale power prices instead.

“The lights are not going to go out. We certainly have enough power stations. But the consequence is the market price might go up.”

Tom Glover, UK country chair of RWE, which owns the biggest fleet of gas power plants in the UK, said he was “deeply disappointed” and his company was facing a “significant negative hit” to its earnings.

Bernstein Research said the suspension of payments would hit earnings at British Gas owner Centrica, plus RWE, Uniper and SSE.

Sara Bell, founder and CEO of Tempus Energy, which started the challenge in 2014, said: “This ruling should ultimately force the UK government to design an energy system that reduces bills by incentivising and empowering customers to use electricity in the most cost-effective way – while maximising the use of climate-friendly renewables.”

The company believes that the capacity market favours fossil fuel generation at the expense of alternative ways of securing electricity supplies, such as “demand side reduction”, where companies reduce electricity demand at times of need.

The winter of 2017/18 was the first year the capacity market was in effect, with companies due to receive £990m for 2018/19. More than half of that is still yet to be paid this winter.

The scheme works by energy companies bidding years in advance for billpayer-funded subsidies to provide backup power at crunch times during winter.

Labour said the ruling meant that the government would have to rethink the market.

Alan Whitehead, shadow energy minister, said: “This judgment effectively annuls previous state aid permission to provide subsidies for existing fossil fuel power plants. I have long criticised this bizarre arrangement, which simply throws money at old dirty power stations.”

Richard Black, director of the ECIU thinktank, said the ruling should be seen as an opportunity for the government to reshape the market away from fossil fuels and towards battery storage and cleaner technologies.

Clark said the government was already in contact with the European commission and seeking state aid approval, so the capacity market could be reinstated. The business secretary used his speech to celebrate the rise of renewables. “Cheap power is now green power,” he said.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

This is the definitive analysis of Brexit.
Stage 1 - the lack of responsibility
Stage 2 - .The arrogance

While I dont disagree with you, I dont entirely disagree with him either. They have bullied us. And we have let them.

Depends on how you read the statement -she has no interest in adding amendments to the current deal, they are at the end of the road with May. Could easily see them reconsidering as they will get more of what they want from a Labour Govt. They would prefer us in the EEA than this mess (IMO) so this is why they may enter into talks.

I read it as pretty absolute, to be honest. I still cant get my head around why, after two years and having us over a barrell, they would go through it again.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Something very interested that was reported last week but that might have been missed with all the May Brexit deal/No confidence hoo-hah:

=====

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...sidies-illegal-european-court-capacity-market

UK's backup power subsidies are illegal, European court rules

Surprise judgement means government must halt capacity market scheme

Adam Vaughan
@adamvaughan_uk
Thu 15 Nov 2018 12.59 GMTLast modified on Fri 16 Nov 2018 16.39 GMT


The capacity market scheme hands tens of millions of pounds a month to owners of coal and gas power stations. Photograph: Jon Bower/Alamy
The UK’s scheme for ensuring power supplies during the winter months has been suspended after a ruling by the European court of justice that it constitutes illegal state aid.

Payments to energy firms under the £1bn capacity market scheme will be halted until the government can win permission from the European commission to restart it.

The scheme subsidises owners of coal, gas and other power stations so the plants are ready to ensure that electricity for businesses and homes is available at peak times in winter.

The UK has also been blocked from holding any capacity market auctions for energy firms to bid for new contracts to supply backup power in the future. National Grid said ministers had instructed it to indefinitely postpone auctions that had been planned for early 2019.


The government said it was disappointed by the judgement but insisted that power supplies were not at risk.

On Thursday, the ECJ ruled that the European commission had failed to launch a proper investigation into the UK’s capacity market when it cleared the scheme for state aid approval in 2014.

The ruling renders the capacity market unlawful for a “standstill period” while ministers seek state aid approval from the European commission. It is not clear how long that will take, but it could be many months.

The court’s surprise judgement was an embarrassment for Greg Clark, the business secretary, who hours later outlined his vision for the future of the power market to energy executives at an event in London.

Industry watchers said the decision would send shockwaves throughout the sector.

“The consequences are absolutely huge. Immediate cessation of payments is going to have immediate consequences for electricity generators that were relying on them,” said Ed Reed, head of research at analysts Cornwall Insight.

While electricity supplies were unlikely to be at risk, he added, companies may seek to recoup lost capacity market revenues through wholesale power prices instead.

“The lights are not going to go out. We certainly have enough power stations. But the consequence is the market price might go up.”

Tom Glover, UK country chair of RWE, which owns the biggest fleet of gas power plants in the UK, said he was “deeply disappointed” and his company was facing a “significant negative hit” to its earnings.

Bernstein Research said the suspension of payments would hit earnings at British Gas owner Centrica, plus RWE, Uniper and SSE.

Sara Bell, founder and CEO of Tempus Energy, which started the challenge in 2014, said: “This ruling should ultimately force the UK government to design an energy system that reduces bills by incentivising and empowering customers to use electricity in the most cost-effective way – while maximising the use of climate-friendly renewables.”

The company believes that the capacity market favours fossil fuel generation at the expense of alternative ways of securing electricity supplies, such as “demand side reduction”, where companies reduce electricity demand at times of need.

The winter of 2017/18 was the first year the capacity market was in effect, with companies due to receive £990m for 2018/19. More than half of that is still yet to be paid this winter.

The scheme works by energy companies bidding years in advance for billpayer-funded subsidies to provide backup power at crunch times during winter.

Labour said the ruling meant that the government would have to rethink the market.

Alan Whitehead, shadow energy minister, said: “This judgment effectively annuls previous state aid permission to provide subsidies for existing fossil fuel power plants. I have long criticised this bizarre arrangement, which simply throws money at old dirty power stations.”

Richard Black, director of the ECIU thinktank, said the ruling should be seen as an opportunity for the government to reshape the market away from fossil fuels and towards battery storage and cleaner technologies.

Clark said the government was already in contact with the European commission and seeking state aid approval, so the capacity market could be reinstated. The business secretary used his speech to celebrate the rise of renewables. “Cheap power is now green power,” he said.

Dont worry though, Labour will be free to re-nationalise whatever they want, at least so Im told...

 

[r-u-s-x]

I read it as pretty absolute, to be honest. I still cant get my head around why, after two years and having us over a barrell, they would go through it again.

because they would prefer we are a member of the EEA or similar, they don't want to deal with the red lines as they have given as much as they want to. Remove these and they can get a better deal on their side. If Labour government think its a better deal on our side as well its win - win, Labour and Tories have different objectives in the Brexit negotiations.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

because they would prefer we are a member of the EEA or similar, they don't want to deal with the red lines as they have given as much as they want to. Remove these and they can get a better deal on their side. If Labour government think its a better deal on our side as well its win - win, Labour and Tories have different objectives in the Brexit negotiations.

The major red line being free movement of people, are Labour giving that up? You really think Corbyn wants to stay in the EEA?

All while the EU have spent two years fudging us? I find it hard to accept, I just dont see what is in it for them compared to what they are getting now.

£40bn and we are their silent bitch.

 

[r-u-s-x]

The major red line being free movement of people, are Labour giving that up? You really think Corbyn wants to stay in the EEA?

All while the EU have spent two years fudging us? I find it hard to accept, I just dont see what is in it for them compared to what they are getting now.

£40bn and we are their silent bitch.

We pay that £40 bn regardless, its what we owe.

Labour are softer on FOM and may give it up - they will sign up to EU laws on workers rights / tax / environment which would be enough for the EU to start talking again IMO.