shurlock

Always happy to educate and enlighten, pal.

That was the Brexit in your head, not the one on the ballot paper. The UK will be leaving the EU. Nothing more, nothing less. Since both parties agree on ending freedom of movement, a Norway type deal seems highly improbable, though there's no reason why it can't be the basis of a temporary arrangement which could last for years. Even within these constraints, however, there's still space for different variants of Brexit (inclduing modest curbs on FoM) which fall far short of the viagra-hard Brexit pursued by the loons. See the Charles Grant quote earlier. At the very least, the election arguably delivered a death blow to leaving the customs union -the DUP doesn't support it; Labour doesn't support it and many Tories, including Davidson's Scottish phalanx don't support it. By extension that will end the UK's ability to strike its own trade agreements, always a fanciful, economically illiterate aspiration given the price that would have to be paid for that right. Perhaps someone should tell Liam Ffux-Adam that he's likely to be out of a job or worse become a glorified head of UKTI.

He did spend a fair amount of time on the right.

How about bad hair days?

I think the Tories should raise the annual ISA allowance (again).

Agree, apologies.

[video=youtube_share;nylBqDwfDrE] And who can forget her description of Nige: "he looks like somebody has put their finger up his bottom and he really rather likes it.” See that Polly T has been tipping Soubry for leader - one of the few who can cross the great divide in the hung parliament Brilliant trolling of the swivel-eyed right though stranger things have happened. Times are a changin'. Deal with it.

No it isn't. One is using the tax system as intended by Parliament, the other isn't. It is a crucial distinction that guides the HMRC in everything it does - the latter can be challenged and defeated by the HMRC. But hey what does the HMRC know - some dimwit on a forum thinks he's uncovered the Panama Papers and knows better. Better try next time. #happyinmysocialistskin

No you're trying to allege hypocrisy and play gotcha. I'll take my cues from the HMRC that says I can live with the happy socialist conscience that I pay my fair share while your claims are entirely specious, if that's OK with you

Trouble undestanding, old man? It's very different. Avoidance is legal but it involves using the tax system differently from the purpose for which it was intended. Parliament did not intend for UK domiciled individuals to establish bogus overseas companies that are controlled from the UK or to manipulate the tax system to gain an advantage. By contrast, parliament fully intended that the British public could utilise tax-free savings, make use of personal allowances and pay into pension schemes to reduce the tax burden.

I don't think you understand how rights and responsibilities work. If the UK isn't willing to accept the responsibilities of being in the EU, it won't enjoy the same rights. Schoolboy stuff.

It's pretty clear that some transitional arrangements will be required. Make the UK suffer? You've been on the kipper glue - if you mean the UK won't be getting something for nothing and a better deal than the it currently enjoys, then clearly. That's commonsense, nowt to do with punishment.

Per Charles Grant (a remainer) "A softer Brexit is unlikely to mean staying in the single market, since the EU would insist on free movement of labour – a price many Conservative and Labour MPs would not want to pay. But a softer Brexit could mean introducing only modest curbs on free movement, staying in EU regulatory agencies and avoiding a dogmatic rejection of any role for the European court of justice (ECJ). It could even mean maintaining the customs union. There would then be no need for controls and perhaps queues on the EU-UK border – or for customs posts between the north and south of Ireland. But the UK would have to adopt EU tariffs and could not negotiate its own free trade agreements with countries outside the EU. Staying in the customs union would madden the Tory right as much as it would please businesses". It would also madden the kipper mentalists on here; but it would be perfectly compatible with the statements made by McDonnell. Whatever transpires, the Brexit that the mentalists were looking forward to a few days ago is now gone forever.

They may accept. And your great hope, Theresa May, may see out the next five years Of course, should they enter the cabinet, nothing will be settled until one knows the terms on which they accept any position and whether Corbyn is willing to compromise or rein in the less savoury parts of the left. Still early days. Alas, you can't see the article for the disingenuous strawman that it is. Ultimately any form of cooperation with Corbyn will be viewed as a betrayal of principle because once upon time Corbyn 'sympathised' with terrorists. As the past cannot be changed, so nothing Corbyn does today or going forward will be sufficient to change your or the article's views on him. That might work in your rancid little echo chamber; most normal people will see straight through it.

Anna Soubry looking upbeat on the BBC earlier, maybe she's heard that Nige is returning, so she can resume wiping the floor with him

Of course there are but they can be discussed and challenged like any other point of view. Where's the evidence that moderates have abandoned their opposition? It's been all of 3 days since the election result. Some have expressed hope that this is a new start, conditional on Corbyn's willingness to compromise and reach out to the rest of the party. Note the article, in drawing a comparison with Trump and the right in the US, refers to intellectuals and journos, not politicians who've happily served under Trump and refused to criticise his most controversial policies. It also massively overstates the backlash to Trump on the right. It's been a tiny minority - when Trump won the presidency, it also put down its arms for a brief period to give him a chance to see if things would change. The article reads like sour grapes to be fair. As for you, you're incapable of engaging in an argument - you can only post links like a performing monkey, blabber on about diversity of opinion yet refuse to defend said link or the fill in the gaps when challenged, a slap in the face of diversity of opinion.

Agree, though am surprised how many second chances he gets. Not convinced all the electorate has seen through the act. No doubt, some dim Tory strategist will think his cheap, cheery optimism can counter Corbyn's enthusiasm and politics of hope.

Thank f**k Batman is in the kitchen, he'd melt and shît his pants at the sound of fireworks, never mind gunfire.

Fiona Hill sounds like my kind of woman - a jock with a taste for expensive shoes who allegedly spat at Philip Hammond and used to cover Scottish division 2 football as a journo

We first need to get rid of pellegrini.

Remind us what the wording of the referendum question was again? That's all that matters.

Rumours that the great forum hope Davidson is planning a Scottish Tory breakaway over differences with May on Brexit. Either way she has already pledged to use her Commons votes to prioritise the single market over curbing immigration. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/09/ruth-davidson-planning-scottish-tory-breakaway-challenges-theresa/

If Carslberg did meltdowns, this would be it, no matter how much you protest. A bit of context is helpful. Just seven weeks ago people spoke about Tory majorities upwards of 80, 100, 120, even 150. Dismal local council election results in early May added to the gloom and sense of inevitability. The British Labour Party, aged 117, was supposedly on the brink of extinction - privately leading Tories viewed the election as a historic opportunity to put Labour out of its misery, once and for all. May was poised to become the most powerful leader in Europe, rivalling German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Far from being destroyed, Labour now has a genuine chance of catching the Tories at the next election. Where Tories held seats they've seen majorities of 10,000 slashed to a few hundred. Like it or not, they have a narrative that resonates with many parts of the country, even with distinctly non-Labour constituencies. It now has time to prepare and refine that message. What's the Tories vision for the future -other than turning deficit reduction into some kind of moral crusade which even May feels uncomfortable with? If the momentum is with Labour, the air is coming out of the Tories. May has been fatally wounded and internal party divisions are ready to erupt; hard Brexit is dead in water, just as other controversial policies from social care to grammar schools are; clouds are gathering over the economy. Never mind that it has to take responsibility for the most complex negotiations in modern peacetime British history and deliver on ludicrously high and incompatible promises. All Labour needs to do is sit and watch and reap the dividends provided it does not misplay its hand (though I have my suspicions). Yet the most nagging and searing fact of all is that this was wholly avoidable. Perhaps you're still trapped in the first stage of grief -denial; but your lot well and truly bottled it.

He's not old by US standards.

Paul Dacre now has a Labour MP.