The Lurker

Which will be a bit of a nightmare if you happen to be truck or coach driver.

Probably..............

It’s interesting; my son is doing his GSCE’s this year and only yesterday we were discussing the pitfall of answering the question want to answer rather than the question you’ve actually been asked. So; making sure you read the question very carefully; for 1 mark please answer the following question: What has changed in the last month (for clarification; not since January) that made yellowhammer go from base case to worst case?

No you didn’t.

I’m not questioning the January leak but stating that I believe the mid-August leak (there has been more than one) stated it was base case and now it’s become worst case. So to clarify my question; what has happened since the mid-August leak that has changed Yellowhammer from base case to worst case?

Pretty sure the ‘base case’ yellowhammer docs were leaked in mid-August. Happy to be corrected with evidence to the contrary.

So what changed in the intervening time between Yellowhammer being a base case and changing to being a worst case? What plans and preparation have been put in place in the month or so to alleviate concerns about the impact of a no deal brexit? I haven’t seen or heard anything to suggest that the situation has improved. Either something changed (in which case what is it?) or the documents have been doctored to make it less embarrassing for brexiteer ministers to continue to support a no deal despite the evidence of their own departments’ forecasts.

I think in the ordinary course of business it’s entirely reasonable to expect that government departments should not be releasing their findings and research as a matter of course but that they should be prepared for that work to be made public if there is a reasonable requirement to do so. Having said that; there is a strong argument for complete transparency so the control of information cannot be influenced on party political lines; giving the public an ability to make their own judgments on policy decisions. Parliament should always have the right to request the release of such documents if it believes or suspects that the Government of the day is suppressing information and research that would indicate that their policies may have negative consequences for the wider public. I’m not saying that a majority government shouldn’t have the right to press forward with policies of their own choosing but they should always be prepared that if those policies prove disastrous and they were warned that that may be the case they should be held accountable at the ballot box by an informed electorate. This doesn't just apply to brexit.

So now we're expected to respect the wishes of a minority? By your stat 34% of people are happy with zero hours so we should ignore the 66% who aren't? 34% is a lot less than 48%.

I now see your point.................

Agreed; if he continues to prevaricate post 31/10 and makes a mess of this then he and Johnson can lift-share to the job center.

And how is democracy being harmed? A democratically elected Parliament, acting under the auspices of an Act of Parliament (which was debated and enacted in a democratically elected Parliament) had a democratic vote to not hold a general election as per the terms of said Act. If it's democracy you're so concerned about then shall we discuss the prorogation of Parliament in an attempt to usurp the sovereign power vested in that institution? or how about sacking 21 MP's for taking part in a democratic vote and exercising their right to vote in the best interests of those they were democratically elected to represent? Better yet; let's talk about the un-elected puppet master that seems to be calling all the shots at Downing Street? Oh, and using the term 'EU elite' in the same sentence as the word 'cliche' is laughable. Simply apposing something that will drag a nation back into the economic and social dark ages does not make someone an 'elite'; especially when the arguments supporting it have turned out to be false.

It does stop it; the whole point of the law is that the UK cannot exit the EU by default without an agreement unless Parliament agrees. Was Boris a chicken for not immediately calling an election as soon as he became leader of the Tories to give him a mandate to lead? It's politics; all sides want an election at the most advantageous time. Johnson does not want to campaign (as he has been doing since taking over) after being forced to either go cap in hand to Brussels (something he vowed not to do) or forcing his own impeachment by breaking the law and refusing to go. Don't get me wrong; I'd like to see an election as soon as possible but not until after it's certain that no deal won't happen at the end of October; we have a lame-duck government which needs replacing as a matter of urgency but preventing no deal takes primacy over that. The whole thing is a shit-show because leaving the EU was always such a nebulous notion that it was impossible for there to ever be any kind of consensus on what it would actually imply and Boris Johnson; by lying to the public during the campaign should be held accountable for this very expensive mess in which the UK finds itself.

It would be insanity for any of the opposition parties to agree to Parliament being dissolved for an election before October 31st. Primarily to ensure no deal doesn't happen if you're a remainer but also to ensure that Johnson is subject to the most humiliation prior to going to the polls by being forced to do what he vowed he wouldn't; unless he goes nuclear and refuses to go to Brussels. I would expect a November election.

I agree that the relationship is mutually beneficial; my point though is that the system currently works due to agreements and accords that will be thrown on the no deal bonfire and will take time to be replaced; in the interim we are all far more vulnerable. France has clearly suffered a disproportionately high number of casualties from daesh inspired attacks; to criticise their security services without taking into account their geography, demographics and colonial history in Islamic counties is unfair. Not naive at all but without the bureaucracy; or to give it another name; a clearly defined legal paradigm for cross border cooperation all parties are powerless to work together. Information that does not pass through the correct channels is as good as useless.

It's a slow day in the office.

From what I recall that was less a failing in information sharing and more a failure to correctly identify the level of threat of certain individuals and then a failure to correctly monitor them. If you’re assessing the effectiveness of any organisation based on its failings then our own security services would be found equally wanting. Either way; one failing cannot be used to damn an entire institution in the face of the many attacks thwarted by good uses and sharing of intelligence; most of which the likes of you and me never find out about.

And the reason is that the Cummings/BoJo cabal are desperate to portray Brexit as some kind of desperate fight to liberate us plucky Brits from the evil EU and somehow invoke the spirit of ’39 because they need to appeal to the little xenophobe that lives in all of us because there is no logical defense for exiting without a deal. Hence the uses of terms like ‘surrender.’ If it’s surrender to not want to end up in a no deal economic ice age than please pass me the white flag. Sadly I do think that we have got to the stage where there are only two possible outcomes for Brexit; no deal or remain. I can't see there being any kind of deal that will satisfy a majority.

Do you really think that the media should afford equal coverage to Corbyn’s brother (mistakenly IMO) stating that the Benn bill gives the EU the power to veto Brexit and BoJo the clown’s brother resigning as both a minister and an MP because he cannot support the disaster policies of his sibling?

I'm no lawyer but I cannot see anything in that bill that suggest that the UK would require the consent of the EU to leave.

I have no idea what you mean by that.

Law enforcement cannot simply share information across a national border without some form of agreement or legal framework; it would be illegal and any action taken based upon illegally shared information would be subsequently illegal so the bad people would get away with whatever they’ve done. Crashing out without a deal voids all agreements with EU member states and will leave UK law enforcement in the dark regards activities in Europe until some kind of replacement arrangement is made. It is not French petulance; although I wouldn’t blame them if it was given how much it will cost them to rebuild the hard border across the channel; but simply complying with law. You say that it beggars belief that the French would deny access to UK security and law enforcement to information; I say it beggars belief that as a nation the UK would even consider taking action that puts them outside of an intelligence gathering framework that has aided our security effectively for many years.

I thought it might be on private land which is a bit of a shame; my point though is that for the last ten years I assumed it was a spoil heap from when they built the golf course!

I like the fairy houses; we spent a few nice afternoons tracking them down and have subsequently been back with visiting friends and family; patronising cafes and pubs that we wouldn’t otherwise have gone to. If I had the time I’d be tempted to make one of my own and put it somewhere just to confuse people. But……… They really ought to have been manufactured locally. A guide to sites of folklore interest should have been produced ready to go when they appeared; tie it in with a series of walks that go past pubs and cafes. The visit Isle of Man site is generally poor at raising awareness of the less well known sites of interest on the Island; I only recently discovered that there are the remains of a Norman motte and bailey in Ballafesson and a civil war fort somewhere on the Island; both sites I’d like to visit; I’m sure there are more. DfE seem to like throwing money at the grand projects but neglect the cheaper, easier basics.

We already do; they call it taxes.