Tomorrow’s Times has a new YouGov poll of the Labour leadership electorate (party members from before the cut-off date, trade union affiliates and £25 registered supporters) showing Jeremy Corbyn with a robust lead over Owen Smith. Topline voting intentions excluding don’t knows are Corbyn 62%, Smith 38%. 8% of voters say don’t know.

Jeremy Corbyn leads convincingly in all three parts of the electorate: among party members he is ahead by 57% to 43%, among trade union affiliates he is ahead 62% to 38%, among registered supporters he is ahead by a daunting 74% to 26%. If the numbers are broken down by length of membership Owen Smith actually leads among those who were members before the last general election, but they are swamped by the influx of newer members who overwhelmingly back Jeremy Corbyn.

The poll was conducted over the weekend, so after Labour members will have started to vote. The actual contest still has three weeks to go, but with people already voting and that sort of lead to make up Owen Smith’s chances do not look good.

Looking to the future, 39% of the selectorate (and 35% of full party members) think it is likely the party will split after the election. 45% of party members who support Owen Smith say that if some MPs opposed to Corbyn were to leave and form a new party they would follow them (29% of Smith supporters say they are likely to leave the party if Corbyn wins anyway… though I’m always a little wary of questions like that, it’s easier to threaten to leave than to actually do it)

YouGov also asked about mandatory re-selection. Party members are divided right down the middle – 46% of full members think MPs should normally have the right to stand again without a full selection, 45% of members think that MPs should face a full reselection before every election. The split is very much along the Smith-Corbyn divide – 69% of Corbyn supporters are in favour of reselections, 77% of Smith supporters are opposed.

Full tabs are here.


1,056 Responses to “YouGov/Times poll of Labour leadership race”

1 17 18 19 20 21 22
  1. @Charles

    That is a very conventional analysis of where future problems lie.

    The chance of the “EU imploding” is next to zero. This fond wish of some nationalist leave supporters is as stupid as wanting the UK to fail in order to prove a point. There is a risk of the Eurozone failing, or more likely mutating, but even here, although there is a sizable body of opinion that it is nonsense in spades, and bound to fail, you would think that after 15 years and several crises, without it collapsing, that people would have a bit more humility on the subject.

  2. Charles

    The biggest threat (if it is materialised) from Brexit is a potential drop in capital inflow (broader than FDI). The would cause a huge problem to the current account.

    However, if it is really about medium term (15 years+), this is nothing compared to the challenge likely to be created by Industry 4.0. Finding jobs for all those manual workers. Followed by the postmen, delivery men, warehouse workers, taxi drivers, bus drivers, health assistants, personalised services (like tailors) employees, employees in the energy sector, etc.

    Society, education, skills, entertainment, community services will really have to be reinvented. That’s much more important (even if not as urgent) than Brexit or some free trade negotiations.

  3. Charles

    Interest Rates can’t go up, the housing bubble would collapse and consumption fall dramatically.

  4. Charles:

    I’d say the analysis of your City friends is pretty much spot on. A large fall in FDI will indeed make our whopping current account deficit hard to sustain, in my view this has always been a much more concerning deficit than the fiscal deficit upon which Osborne was so damagingly fixated.

    The possible upside for business is that if the pound falls by enough to substantially reduce the current deficit, that implies either a large increase in exports or a large fall in imports (or a bit of both). Either way, that in turn implies an equally substantial fall in living standards, as the lower pound will fuel inflation.

  5. I left out the train drivers, the conductors, the people who check your tickets at the stations, and a lot more. Millions of jobs will have to go, and millions of jobs will be created, but it will require a massive political planning – to deal with the transitional period.

    It won’t be gradual in a sector, but one massive hit. And it is not futurology, but reality.

  6. JOHN CHANIN

    So I’m stupid for believing the EU faces real problems which could lead to it failing. Then the Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz is stupid as well because that’s what he thinks as well ( see earlier on this thread). I suggest you think before you call those you disagree with “stupid”, it’s not worthy of you.

  7. @LASZLO
    … the challenge likely to be created by Industry 4.0.
    Pie In The Sky pish, I’m afraid. We’ll still need people to do all those jobs you mention.

    I remember in the mid-1980s, when I started working in the IT industry, everyone was talking about the ‘paperless office’.

    Companies still use as much paper now as they did then, 30 years ago.

  8. Laszlo

    “……………this is nothing compared to the challenge likely to be created by Industry 4.0. ”

    How true that is, Brexit is nothing to the problems that new technology is creating.

  9. David Carrod

    It is really very different. I remember the hype of the 1980s – it would have happened, not as radically as this one, just suddenly firms found 600 million workers (in China).

    However, now the leading firms are cash rich, and are more willing to trade off current investment against future variable cost. They also deal with constraints differently (cf Amazon’s warehouses).

    German car manufacturers insist now on suppliers having a production software integrated with theirs, and actually their computers trigger the production schedule and inventory in the suppliers. The same thing is happening in household stuff. Bosch is one of the leading companies in the experiment.

  10. @ John Channin – Assuming you are right that this is conventional (I would not know), is it an analysis that would probably be shared by the Treasury, Hammond ans so on? And if so what is the likely effect on their Brexit negotiating stance?
    @ John Channin and TOH – For what its worth my city friends (its actually even worse they are relatives, although of a different political persuasion) thought that the EU would be in serious trouble in the next three years and this would not be good for us
    @Laszlo I may have misrepresented my informants in the matter of Capital Inflow and FDI. I accept your correction of course.
    @ Laszlo I agree that robots etc may mean that some jobs will disappear (same has happened with Ostlers and most agricultural jobs). Would be interesting to know which will go though. Are carers more likely to disappear than computer programmers? (Or may be there will still be programmers but only in India
    @Cambridge Rachel. In a sense that was what they were saying. The conventional answer to inflation seems to be to put up interest rates. We are, however, in a situation where this is very difficult
    @Sommerjohn Clearly the falling pound should help our industries and particularly so while we are still in the EU. Will it help the City equivalently and if services are what we sell are we likely to sell more or them?

    Anyway many thanks to enlightening me further about what I was told.

  11. @TOH

    Reread my comment. The stupidity is in wishing the EU to implode. The consequences of this would be very serious indeed, including for Britain.

    Luckily it is very unlikely to happen.

    I get much more from reading Kahnemann than Stiglitz.

  12. Laszlo

    I don’t think it will be a sudden change like you think, but a gradual (relatively, over 1-2 generations) as the technology horizon expands so that the jobs can be done via technology. There will also be a delay between “can be done” and “can be done cheaper than a worker”. It will take adapting to but there isn’t much way of predicting the rate at which this change will take place and the pace will be slow enough that governments can adapt.

    I hope to be one of those pushing that horizon forward as fast as possible. Life will be a lot more fun once the most menial tasks are done for us.

  13. A reminder that what was on the ballot of the referendum was “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”

    The following were not mentioned on the ballot:
    * Immigration controls of any kind.
    * The future relationship with the EU.
    * Funding of the NHS.

    Comments that 52% of the nation voted for any of the above are therefore misguided, without the benefit of reading the minds of every voter. Polling is also of no help here, as people are not very good at explaining why they voted the way they did in polls, nor even of accurately saying how they had voted.

    The nation has not made any declaration about what must and must not be red lines in the Article 50 Negotiations.

    A follow up caution. Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz does not think the EU is imploding. There have been some above who have taken some of his writing out of context, to propose that the EU is in immediate risk. Joseph Stiglitz repeatedly stated throughout the Greek crisis that Greece was not at dramatic risk of a default, and that the actual greatest risk to the EU comes from over-reliance on Austerity measures. He does state that the Euro comes at great current cost to Europe because of economic issues and political reluctance, but it is not a fundamental problem that means the EU is doomed to failure.

    Joseph Stiglitz is not an idiot. But those who wilfully or ignorantly misquote him, may well be so.

    And to quote the man himself “I think this illustrates a general point: that leaving the EU is not going to immunise you against bad policies. You can have bad policies in or out of the EU. My view is very strongly that austerity doesn’t work and the only reason that Britain has done as well as it has done is really because it hasn’t had as much austerity as George Osborne claimed.”

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2016/09/05/interview-joseph-stiglitz-brexit-euro-mistake/

  14. @ Charles

    You can assume that the Treasury is very concerned about FDI (and capital flows in general), and is already taking strenuous steps to try and calm things down. Of course it will affect Leave negotiations.

    I suspect the approach will be to seek to make Britain a more favourable place for big business by reducing (or abolishing Corporation Tax). This will of course make the primary deficit on current account worse, so they will have to be even tougher on public spending, or put up other taxes. There are no free lunches.

  15. Charles

    Carers is an interesting thing for the future – the service will have to be organised differently.

    I have seen apps used in the US and in the high end private medical care in China that records enormous amount of data (does a questionnaire, records test results, measures movement, etc) processed in the health centre triggering intervention (visiting the patient, calling in the patient, deeming the scheduled visit unnecessary, whatever).

    In one US case, the app is connected to the content of the fridge, so the social care visitor knows if he or she would have to bring shopping. It is capable of even checking if ironing, washing were done, but the appliances are not yet up to the technology.

    It actually increased the number of carers, but it is done very, very differently. Moreover, it allows more social time with the users, chats, and alike.

  16. Charles

    Computer programmers are not likely to go any time soon, (there will likely be a drift towards mathematicians/statisticians who can code).

    Carers are unlikely to go any time soon, although a lot of their work could be freed up with monitoring being overseen by machine, so you’ll need less human carers per patient/resident and their time will be freed up to do more “caring”.

    I suspect over the next 15 years, rather than entire jobs going, certain tasks will become automated and certain tasks will not, requiring lower staffing levels rather than replacing entire sectors.

  17. Alan

    I said 15 years +. And it will be different in different institutional settings. China can do things that the UK can’t.

    The speed? We will see. The Spanish post office is experimenting with drones. Amazon got to the point where they could not push their warehouse employees any further (13 miles a day, extremely fast and error free packaging), and their policy of we are paying you if you are burnt out and you want to leave also reached the limit, so they are implementing robots (largely, but not exclusively, developed in house). Of course they are also on the drones. (But it is important that the whole things are not merely about robots).

    In the UK a fully automated train system could be rolled out in less than a decade (theoretically, the skill base doesn’t exist, so it cannot be – without importing EU and other people :-)). This is one of the reasons why I’m so hesitant about railway nationalisation. If they renationalise (both candidates), and they are for technological advancement (both candidates), then the automation should be done, and a lot of jobs would have to go. Not an attractive thing for the government, is it? So, there would have to be transitional measures, which can be costly and highly unpopular. Talking about slogans, policies, and the real task …

    And I fully agree with you on the perspectives. But there are many more political issues there than technological.

  18. JOHN CHANIN

    “Reread my comment. The stupidity is in wishing the EU to implode. The consequences of this would be very serious indeed, including for Britain.”

    Although not a fan of the EU obviously I have no problem with it’s existence as long as it does not interfere with the UK. I don’t wish it ill as long as we are out of it. Unlike you however I do this it is very likely to fail, or at least it is very likely that the Euro will fail. I only quoted Stiglitz because he happens to have the same view as me on this and clearly he is not a stupid man.

  19. Laszlo

    I wonder when economists and politicians can be replaced?

  20. Alan

    :-)

    I was discussing this with a German manufacturer. He thought accountants could go, except for the financial experts, but of course, they would decide who would lose their jobs, so they won’t.

    He also reckoned that lawyers cannot be replaced, so they are safe, and due to the provisional increased stress more psychologists (they don’t really talk about counselling) would be needed.

    He had a pretty bad opinion of politicians, but he thought that they are quite robotic anyway, responding to certain words in a predetermined manner.

    The only thing that saved me from his negative views was that I pointed out to him that according to his shining new manufacturing plan (done by a wonderful piece of software) upstream would have to have about 50% excess upstream capacity (in normal times), so he had better find a technological solution, because his bosses were unlikely to be happy.

  21. Laszlo

    In other times the impact of new technology and greater productivity has been balanced by higher wages and shorter working hours. Unfortunately in the 30 odd years very little of the increased productivity has gone to the workers, capital has mostly kept such gains for itself. I suspect this is what you are driving at, that the future becomes impossible to manage unless we change the relationship between capital and labor

  22. Laszlo

    I think that the task of “coming up with manufacturing plans” is likely to be under fire (or at least the role changed, as machine optimisation takes over the bulk of the work).

  23. @Laszlo and Alan – I suppose this issue of replacing staff is what the train driver’s strike is about. Personally I like places where there are staff about. I always go to the staffed rather than the automated checkouts when I can and I enjoy chatting to the people at them. I like libraries with helpful staff and parks that are tended by gardeners who are proud of what they do, locks with lock keepers and so on and so forth. And as i approach an age when some kind of care may well be a necessity, I would like at least some of this to come from a human being.

    I know that in the end this comes down to cost and what I am prepared to pay for what. So it is inconsistent that I go to supermarkets rather than corner shops, that I sometimes shop on line and that I grumble about the cost of rail fares which i consider iniquitous while equally wanting people at my stations and on my trains. It is just that we need to recognize that the value of humans is never precisely equivalent to that of machines even when they are apparently doing the same job.

    Perhaps the best option is to let people choose (pay at the pump or pay at the kiosk). A bit more expensive but worth paying for in my view. Perhaps there should be a poll on it..

  24. JAYBLANC

    JAYBLANC

    Re Stiglitz.

    I notice you did not mention the title of his book which I think says a great deal “The Euro: How a Common Currency Threatens the Future of Europe”.

    His basic theme of the book is that the Euro is bound to fail as it is currently structured and this poses a threat the existence of the EU itself, exactly the point I have been making.

    So your comment:

    “Joseph Stiglitz is not an idiot. But those who wilfully or ignorantly misquote him, may well be so” clearly does not apply to me.

    I realise you wanted to stay in the EU (I’m assuming you live in this country, but you never answered my question), but why do you have to start insulting people you disagree with, your as bad as some other I could name. Most of us try to have a civilized debate lets keep it that way.

  25. Colin

    I hope that’s right, I have to say I share some of the concerns expressed above.

  26. Industry 4.0!! who mentioned that? I fear for the polling industry because they may end up having to poll robots that are programmed to give a particular answer but until that day thankfully my favorite Lord is still polling us humans.
    …….
    “From my new poll: in Brexit negotiations, should we prioritise immigration control, or access to the single market?”

    https://twitter.com/LordAshcroft/status/772705722073280512

  27. THE OTHER HOWARD
    Colin
    “I hope that’s right, I have to say I share some of the concerns expressed above”
    ___________

    Calm down dear boy we’re still some way off from fully automated allotments. ;-)

  28. @DAVID CARROD

    “Companies still use as much paper now as they did then, 30 years ago.”

    I beg to differ. I work in IT and pens and notebooks are hard to find these days. Most meetings are crammed with laptops, not papers.
    The only businesses that need paper seem to me to be lawyers or surveyors, where contracts etc need to be kept and stored.

  29. @JAYBLANC

    “Comments that 52% of the nation voted for any of the above are therefore misguided, without the benefit of reading the minds of every voter. Polling is also of no help here, as people are not very good at explaining why they voted the way they did in polls, nor even of accurately saying how they had voted.”

    Absolutely. Those who voted leave did so for many different reasons, most of which are completely confused ones. The younger Brexiters seem to be more concerned with immigration and the older ones with sovereignty. Of course, leaving the EU is not likely to reduce immigration and national sovereignty was never threatened by the EU anyway, given all the opt outs we had.

  30. THE OTHER HOWARD

    From Colin’s link…..

    “In 1871, 6.6% of the workforce of England and Wales were classified as agricultural labourers. Today that has fallen to 0.2%, a 95% decline in numbers”
    ___

    Does this include allotment holdings? I think you’re right to be concerned. ;-)

    To be fair some industries will obviously see a reduction in manpower when new technologies are introduced but today’s IT experts will be tomorrows forgotten. We re continuously evolving and change should be embraced.

  31. @Colin Thanks for that link which is very interesting. That said, there are some caveats

    a) In my experience technology does not always lead to efficiency. I happened to be in the Civil Service when large scale photocopying came in. The consequence was that instead of business being handled by passing a file in orderly fashion round a ring of about five people who were those who had a genuine interest in the matter, the originator would cover her or his back by sending a memo to about 50 people, few of whom had the time to read the thing properly and any of whom might take up time by responding with a random comment. My impression is that the same thing often happens with email. Paradoxically skilled practitioners of such circulation can actually get their way more easily than in the old days. Seeing one is one of fifty on a list does not encourage close attention to something that is obviously going to be looked at from every conceivable angle.

    b) The jobs are less likely to be unionised (not I know a matter you regret) and some of them are in the public sector or dependent on the pubic sector. In consequence they are often low payed and insecure which is something of which I do not think you approve.

    c) The assumption that technology will go on creating more and more high skill jobs may be false. For example, as machines get better and better at pattern recognition may we not be able to replace radiographers with computers? As AI develops may we machines not only be able to beat world experts at GO and Chess but create as well as check elegant mathematics? And even if these things take time to come to pass what’s to stop exporting a lot of high skill tasks down the line to India or somewhere that will do them at lest cost. (Indeed this already may be a best buy for some medicine even though the person has to travel).

  32. Technology is getting better and better and it shouldn’t be feared. Today I was speaking to a nice gentleman from Hartlepool county council on the phone. Later on I was speaking to a colleague of mine from our head office in Glasgow via Skype and just about an hour ago I was emailing a large PDF document to a representative at Zurich Airport?.
    .People are employed to make all of this happen.

    It gets better…I just checked the train times on my iphone..

    17:35 London Waterloo [WAT]
    Winchester [WIN]
    Platform 2
    18:29 54m

    Think I will make it? I’m off

  33. Charles

    You assume people in India are where all this research is taking place? It’s not a simple discipline which any code monkey can come up with. What lies behind AI is not a series of IF ELSE statements.

    It’s more a field for mathematicians/statisticians and right now they aren’t being outsourced to India. It’s unlikely that the cutting edge will ever be outsourced to India. We don’t see Tata developing a self driving car.

    I don’t think anyone could develop a car which could drive safely in India, any algorithm would probably decide the safest course of action would be to refuse to start.

    A self driving car would be a better option than riding a bike back from the pub though.

  34. @Charles
    Did no-one ration the paper?

  35. TOH

    “Why do you have to start insulting people you disagree with”

    Probably a question to ask yourself as your posts quite often veer into that category and I should know as I’ve read many hundreds of them in recent years. To quote your recent one to me you said I had no knowledge of negotiation. As it happens I have negotiated for TUs vs management, for management vs TUs, for my former UK Government Department in Cabinet Committees, for the UK Government in the EU and international organisations and for UN agencies and Treaty bodies in their dealings with Governments. I was lead negotiator in creating several successful international agreements on environmental issues. I am deeply involved in my retirement in negotiating new agreements to protect elephants from Ivory hunters. So you were a bit off the mark there. You are the first person who has ever told me I don’t know anything about negotiation.

    Nor did I claim you were a Conservative member. I carefully used the words “the Party you support “. If you haven’t been voting Conservative recently you can correct me, but not otherwise. Most other posters seem to interpret your politics as I do !

    You didn’t choose to answer the central point I made in my email last night which is that we have alienated virtually all the other major economic powers. Japan are not blackmailing us. They are telling us that the reason they invested in key manufacturing capacity in UK was so they could access customers in the rest of EU without tariff or other barriers. They are warning that in their own economic interest those industries are likely to relocate to the EU if we cannot remain in the Single Market.

  36. @Tancred
    “national sovereignty was never threatened by the EU anyway, given all the opt outs we had.”

    That takes the biscuit.

    In that case why will it take between 7 to 10 years to unpick all the EU law that has been imposed on us?

    Why has Junker just told May that she cannot even discuss future possible trade deals before we have completely left the EU?

    Why did Edward Heath lie to the British People in 1972 saying no essential sovereignty would be lost. And then in 1990 admitted he had lied because, “the British People are too stupid to govern themselves”?
    (He also admitted that he knew he was joining a European Superstate. He also destroyed the UK fishing industry by offering that as a bargaining chip to join – even though fishing waters were not included in the Treaty of Rome.)

    Why is this quote over the door of the EU Parliament Visitors Center: “National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.”

    And why would Professor Anthony King observe in his book The British Constitution – “Not only did Parliament cease to be sovereign, Britain itself ceased to be an old-fashioned sovereign state. The fact of being a member of the EU permeates almost the whole of the British government – to a far greater extent than most Britons seem to realise.”

  37. Talking about competence….

    How incompetent is it to accidentally tweet a picture which includes a whiteboard with your servers name, address and passcode? Im very relaxed about internet security but even I wouldn’t write those details on a white board, accidentally tweeting a pic of it is what happens when you have already done something unwise

  38. French farmers and Lorry drivers have blockaded Calais in protest at the actions of people smugglers bringing the pace to a standstill by blocking roads at night with logs.

    A spokesman for the protesters said;

    “Hey that’s our job!”

    Peter.

  39. @SEACHANGE

    “In that case why will it take between 7 to 10 years to unpick all the EU law that has been imposed on us?”

    It wasn’t imposed on us. We agreed to this when we joined – it was part of the whole deal.

    “Why has Junker just told May that she cannot even discuss future possible trade deals before we have completely left the EU?”

    These are the rules of the EU club, to which we signed up at the Lisbon Treaty. You can’t ignore a rule you’ve signed up just because you don’t like it.

    “Why did Edward Heath lie to the British People in 1972 saying no essential sovereignty would be lost. And then in 1990 admitted he had lied because, “the British People are too stupid to govern themselves”?
    (He also admitted that he knew he was joining a European Superstate. He also destroyed the UK fishing industry by offering that as a bargaining chip to join – even though fishing waters were not included in the Treaty of Rome.)”

    Rubbish. Of course some sovereignty needs to be sacrificed when you join an organisation like the EU, just as we sacrifice our sovereignty in NATO and other international organisations we are members of. But if we did not have essential sovereignty then no British government could even have called a referendum on EU membership as it would have been vetoed! Pretty obvious.

    “Why is this quote over the door of the EU Parliament Visitors Center: “National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.””

    The EU has always been about pooling sovereignty in certain areas – this has never been a secret. The European Parliament exists to give democratic representation to the peoples of the EU when it comes to approving or rejecting legislation proposed by the European Commission.

    What you constantly ignore is that we have had numerous opt outs agreed on areas that have impinged on our sovereignty further. These opt outs would have ensured that no more areas of national sovereignty would be passed to the EU. Therefore there was never any need to vote to leave the EU if sovereignty was such a big concern.

  40. @seachange

    “In that case why will it take between 7 to 10 years to unpick all the EU law that has been imposed on us?”

    It hasn’t been imposed on us. We have been part of an organisation where we have participated in agreeing common rules and legislation.

    “Why has Junker just told May that she cannot even discuss future possible trade deals before we have completely left the EU?”

    Can you reference that? My understanding as confirmed by Davis’ statement today is that the UK can negotiate deals but not sign them until we have left the EU.

  41. EH, just exactly why should a hugely indebted over governed and bureaucratic country like Italy with a shaky banking system leaving the Euro damage the Euro????

    If anything getting rid of the liability to bail out a country that big that has avoided addressing it’s problems for decades should strengthen it!

    Peter.

  42. “”“Why is this quote over the door of the EU Parliament Visitors Center: “National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times””

    Is that really quoted there? Who said that originally?

  43. Nato works by unanimity and is central to the IK’s defence so a country as small as Luxembourg or Iceland that doesn’t even have an army can block a UK proposal without any discussion.

    That would seem to me a greater curtailment of our sovereignty on a crucial area of national interest…Security, that the EU agreeing a deal on milk quotas after negotiations by a qualified majority.

    haven’t seen many brexiteers saying we should leave Nato!

    Peter.

  44. ProfHoward

    The quotation is from Kerr.

  45. Those who constantly harp on about the EU and sovereignty should remember that we signed away a lot of our sovereignty when we became allies of the USA in WW2 and then through NATO. We became dependent on American financial aid during and after the war as we were effectively bankrupt and the Americans exacted a steep price for this help. The loss of the Empire was the biggest price, and we lost many lucrative markets to the Americans as a result. The disaster of Suez merely confirmed that we had become little more than an American puppet. This is the main reason why post war politicians from MacmIllan onwards decided that we should fully immerse ourselves in the European project. It wasn’t Heath who was the first one who wanted Britain in the then Common Market – it was Macmillan. Britain needed to find a role and a solid market place for trade – Europe provided these.
    After 43 years of being ‘in Europe’ we have now decided to revert to being little Englanders once again, locked behind the moat of the Channel and looking at the outside world with uncertainty. All because of unjustified paranoia about sovereignty and panic about immigration when we had already absorbed millions of immigrants since the early ’50s. Time will tell, but I am sure that leaving the EU will prove to be a failure. Unfortunately this country needs to have its face rubbed deeply in manure before it understands its mistakes – this is how we are as a nation, alas. And the manure will come, you can be sure of that.

  46. Now, in spite of the Kerr quotation, oddly there is no mention of the Churchill quotation: “we must build a kind of United States of Europe” (for the working class – he said). – September 1946.

    Quotations are weird things.

  47. @Hireton – It’s widely quoted here’s a source

    http://www.newindianexpress.com/world/Britain-nears-post-Brexit-trade-talks-with-Australia-PMs/2016/09/05/article3613373.ece

    On EU law

    The appointed European Commission drafts laws and these are passed onto the statute book over the head of Parliament with no right of redress as EU Law is supreme. That is imposition.

    Yes we agreed to it as we gave away our sovereignty which was my point however people want to spin it.

    Just because we have some minor opt outs doesn’t mask the fact that we were part of a project that’s final conclusion was complete political union and the de facto end of the UK.

    This was never communicated to the British people in the 1972 Act and it was only partially alluded to during the 1975 referendum but almost completely suppressed.

  48. @PETER CAIRNS (SNP)

    “haven’t seen many brexiteers saying we should leave Nato!”

    Indeed. It’s because the Mail, Sun and Express haven’t been preaching to leave NATO for the last 30 years.
    However, Trump has made noises that the USA might wish to leave NATO, and if this happened after he became president it would have huge ramifications for our national security. We have nuclear weapons at the discretion of the USA and much of our essential defence infrastructure relies on American assistance. What would happen then? Has anyone reflected on this? Trump winning the election is not impossible – he is improving in the polls now.

  49. Thanks Lazlo. I guess Kerr was talking about the Nazis but I am not sure one can say that national sovereignty is the *cause* of evil. Certainly it can be used for evil purposes.

1 17 18 19 20 21 22