Who should be next UK PM?

Maybe the theory is many EU residents will leave the UK post Brexit thereby leaving empty homes and reducing demand. That begs the question of who is going to do the work they currently do. The NHS has already serious staff shortages. Will Brits follow suit and leave empty homes in Spain and contribute to the glut of housing? I do see currently a plethora of privately owned properties up for sale as I travel in Spain. Currently, the market seems awash. I'm sure Brexit may be a contributory cause.

It's almost impossible now to see any other outcome to Brexit other than the UK crashing out on 31st October. Unless Boris Johnson pulls an election rabbit out of the hat the EU will not grant any further extension.

Everyone should prepare themselves for Britain having EU third nation status with all the negativity that entails. The best hope for Brits staying on as residents in Spain lies with bilateral treaties and coping with a currency worth less than a Euro.

And the best the EU can hope for is that they don't go bankrupt once the cash cow has left.

B Johnson will not drag UK out of EU with no deal as the Government will collapse and he will not want to lose the job of PM.

He just has to come up with the mumble jumble that he will use that explains why he has to:

a.) delay

b.) revoke

c.) hold a new referendum

Perry

Parliament has proved so far to be pretty toothless in attempting to stop no deal. Johnson's a kamikaze politician he will go for it claiming it's the public's expressed wish and challenge parliament to try and stop him. He will then own the consequences however and last no more than a year before the government collapes under the economic shock from a no deal exit.

He won't get no deal through parliament...nor will the commons allow itself to be prorogued ?......There's enough tories to vote no confidence in the government and therefore a general election well before October 31'st.  If that happens the tories are toast so Boris wil avoid it. Actually the torie are toast regardless of theBrexit outcome...they're too thick to realise it

"....the best the EU can hope for...." Jarvi, if you want a shot at composing ludicrous HEADLINES for the Express, you MUST remember to throw in some arbitrary CAPITALISATION!

The best the UK can hope for now is probably for BoJo to get the job and then prove true to form: he's the only candidate who can really be relied on to gladly deny everything he's said previously, happily go back on any promises he might have made, and shamelessly admit that the whole debacle has been a monumentally bad idea (and just laugh at anyone who points out that it was actually his idea). I think Perry's prediction may be spot on. On the other hand, he may just surprise everyone by actually doing what he says he'll do for once, and then Micky's scenario is more likely. One thing's for sure - nobody here (or anywhere else as far as I can tell) can answer my question about the supposed benefits of leaving anymore. I don't think even Boris is pretending anymore. 

Any rational, independent analysis of the advantages of leaving the EU are completely cancelled out by the disadvantages. The problem, of course, lies in the political dogma of national sovereignty and what that actually means. To the ordinary person it means little but to would be politicians with a greasy pole to climb it's an axe to grind, a necessary cause on the route to national prominence.

It goes like this. Find a cause to fight that raises your personal profile. One that the wealthy will give you shed loads of cash to fight because they are fed up with paying too much tax. Get the tabloid newspapers onside that Joe public believes print the truth. Then you're off to the races.

All you then need is a stupid Prime Minister to give you a referendum and voilà your rich and famous too. Who then cares about the damage? You can slope off to comfortable anonymity with your cash pile. 

I've been concerned by the sudden shift to the right of the Tories, but perhaps this is just the leadership hopefuls playing to their closed audience.

I've never voted for Labour or UKIP/Nigel Farage in my life, but I'm now hoping there is an early election as this will in effect be a "yes or no" on Brexit.  So a bit of democracy rather than us being ruled by Tory dogma.

Yes the downside is Jeremy and his clowns for a while, arguably less worse than Farage, but in the longer term this will be less costly than the alternative.

For those interested in seeing the first of the hustings taking place in Birmingham between Hunt and Johnson, this is the you tube footage ( note worth fast forwarding the first 31 mins whilst they were awaiting the start!)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_Eu8E21_efk

This is apparently the first of 16 hustings taking place up and down the country, where each candidate will be cross questioned.

"...the downside is Jeremy and his clowns for a while....but in the longer term this will be less costly than the alternative"

Spot on, Acer.

I notice that the emphasis has suddenly become beating Corbyn. Presumably this is a ploy to frighten even the most moderate Tories, but even if Corbyn did win a general election, there's a chance to reverse the damage that may do in five years time. Unfortunately, once we leave the EU there's no going back - at least, not on such favourable terms as we currently enjoy. The damage will be permanent.

I also notice one prominent tabloid BOLDY printed that this weekend would START with 60 hours of RAIN! I know it rains a lot in the UK, but even so....sadly, as Micky says, Joe public still believes they print the truth!

If you were the CEO of an important company and were looking for a new chief executive to take the company forward and Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt arrived for the short list interview who would you choose?

Running a country is slightly more important so character matters. The problem for the ordinary voters in the UK is Johnson has that old Etonian sense of entitlement, the star quality the Tory faithful love. It matters not you are less than useful at doing anything constructive only the ability to win elections matters.

So a GE with Corbyn, Farage and Johnson going head to head and the outcome is almost a shoo-in for 5 more Tory years. They can always get rid of him afterwards after the first expected cock up. That's the logic anyway.

Nothing quite like judging from  firsthand experience in the country as you travel around, or listen to citizen live debate where the living realities, whether good or bad, tend to come to the fore! 

But also being able to take some of the exaggerated nonsense with a pinch of salt! ;)

Its like anything in life, judge as you find so to speak, but much depends upon individual psyche whether positive or negative, whether willing to listen to others with different perspectives in the hope of formulating workable balanced solutions when required.

At the end of the day it’s about caring sufficiently to achieve a good balance, and in the main the UK are a generous and inclusive nation of people,  but when called for willing to stand up against abuse and inflexible interference when it starts to harm the very fabric and social structure, the cohesive good nature of the people. 

In terms of first hand experience perhaps people are sick and tired of the extremes where country debt spirals, requiring austerity measures to bring it back to good health.... but no doubt that’s where the skill to managing a nations economy and achieving a good balance lies. The trouble comes perhaps when that control and natural  balance  is lost to outside influences beyond a nation’s control, hence the current debate!

P.s. Our posts crossed Mickeyfinn, so in terms of the leader, whether temporary or otherwise, we need someone with a sense of realism adept at comprehending the detail and strong negotiating skills to fight the UKs corner in the hope that a mutually beneficial deal can be accommodated, sometimes forgotten in political games where citizens best interests can be lost in the process of “ one - upmanship “. 

This message was last edited by ads on 24/06/2019.

There is a new independent academic evaluation report on Brexit from Kings Colledge London. It's worth reading just to understand the social impact of leaving the EU has on UK society.

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/new-academic-report-evaluates-impacts-of-brexit-to-date/

Thanks Mickeyfinn.

The Economic and Social Research Council(ESRC) is part of UK Researchand Innovation (UKRI). UKRI is a non-departmental public body (NDPB) fundedby the UK government. ESRC provides fundingand support for researchand training in the social sciences.

Question:

Not dismissing the broad spectrum of knowledge, is the ERSC sufficiently independent when its chief executives have close connections with the EU, namely a subsequent holder went on to be Secretary General of the European Science Foundation and the current holder gained a first class degree in European Politics and has advised The European Commission and several European governments? Doesn’t funding come from UK Governments who have until more recently (since the citizen referendum) been keen to remain in the EU? 

Also important to consider the sources of academic funding in the UK for the various notable academic institutions, not least Kings College London? 

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/research/support/applications/international

“The International Research Funding Office provides end-to-end support service to all researchers participating in collaborative and complex projects funded by international funding sources like the European Commission and the NIH.”

Whilst it is no doubt good to hear of support for the academic institutions, might there be some conflict of interests to consider here? 

The age old argument remains....How can you remain truly independent in your research and conclusions, whilst biting the hand that feeds you? 

Just hoping that good trusted open minded factual reasoning prevails, which takes sufficient regard for citizens best interests alongside the need for realistic growth strategies that don’t harm the existing fabric of nation states (not just the UK), which leads to insecurity and division.

Just a thought... 

So....reading between (the many) lines.....

"....people are sick and tired of the extremes where country debt spirals, requiring austerity measures to bring it back to good health.....when control and natural balance is lost to outside influences beyond a nation’s control..." Are you saying that one benefit of leaving the EU is that these "outside influences" (The EU?) will no longer be able to inflict this yo-yoing? That the EU is the cause?

And: "hoping that good trusted open minded factual reasoning prevails....and realistic growth strategies that don’t harm the existing fabric of nation states (not just the UK), which leads to insecurity and division." Are you saying that the EU leads to insecurity and division? Surely it's the stupid referendum that has led directly to division in the UK like never before, rather than EU membership? I thought one of the fundamental objectives of the EU was greater unity, economic & social etc., which seems to be the complete opposite of what you're suggesting. Or am I misunderstanding....?

It's really is difficult to imagine a scenario that would be less destructive for the UK than leaving the EU without any deal whatsoever. Yet that is exactly what the current Tory leadership contenders keep threatening in order to try and get their party extremists to support them. Not only will that destroy the economic future for an entire generation, it almost certainly will lead to the political break up of the United Kingdom.

The political posturing of everyone involved is breathtakingly reckless and stupid  Even leave supporters are beginning to understand that. Donald Tusk is absolutely right when he said today that the UK is wasting all the time it has left.

Roberto,

I’m saying that the lack of control from free movement on the UK and other member states who were exposed to major debt following the financial crash ( some were impacted far worse than others), which required austerity measures, was exacerbated by the EU failing to recognise the impact that their continuing swift movements of people were having on these countries.. The EU in effect failed  to factor into their strategy the wide differentials relating to debt between member states. 

So when Cameron came into power he was not only contending with the Blair years when he had wrongly and somewhat cynically opened the doors to the first round of EU citizens ( when other member states hadn’t done so) who he considered would  boost  labour votes without realising the impact on infrastructure, housing etc etc., Cameron’ s pleas  to extend the timeframe associated with the next round of movements, fell on deaf ears. He asked for an extension of delay from 7 years to  thirteen years, but the EU Commission refused to acknowledge the problems....And the rest was history...

As for other problems relating to growth ,it’s  well recognised now that the EU failed to plan their free movement strategy effectively and failed to recognise the impact on youth unemployment and stripping member states of their skilled labour as citizens desperately left their countries in search of work. Insufficient pre planning to allow other member states adequate time to accommodate for these movements of people. Insufficient time to recognise how wage differentials would impact  nations workforces, living standards, pressures on health and education systems, etc , let alone the impact on cohesion in those member states ...

Sadly there’s  a major difference between what was hoped for by being part of the European Union and what actually transpired, Roberto.

Mickeyfinn,

Donald Tusk should be doing all in his power to sort out the backstop issue and make a deal possible instead of allowing tensions to rise which ironically only hardens citizens perception of an intransigent EU unwilling to seek out mutually beneficial deals.

I'm really trying to understand...please be patient with me. I think I get it now; it's those 70 million pesky Turks (erroneously represented by images of Syrian refugees fleeing a war zone) who thankfully won't be adding to the country's woes once we're safely out, isn't it? I'm not quite sure how freedom of movement caused massive youth unemployment in Spain, but I'm willing to concede that it contributed to the drain of labour from Romania (for example). Nevertheless, even after Brexit, there will still be high unemployment in Spain and Romanians will still leave for opportunities elsewhere in the EU, so there won't be any obvious benefit to those countries, but more to the point I struggle to see how either of these issues can be related to a benefit to the UK by leaving. Perhaps when all the Spanish nurses have abandoned the NHS and the Romanians have left the fields full of rotting crops it will all become clear.

Meanwhile, I just watched BoJo's latest interview with Laura Kuenssberg. He seems utterly befuddled and even more clueless than me about just WTF is going on. Pity the nation.....

ads - I’m saying that the lack of control from free movement on the UK and other member states who were exposed to major debt following the financial crash ( some were impacted far worse than others), which required austerity measures, was exacerbated by the EU failing to recognise the impact that their continuing swift movements of people were having on these countries.. The EU in effect failed  to factor into their strategy the wide differentials relating to debt between member states. 

That if I may say so in BoJo's words is "an inverted pile of piffle". You are in effect saying the EU should adapt it's core principles on which they base the entire strategic process of a political union with 27 nations and change them as and when economic difficulties arise.

It would be like the Catholic Church agreeing for its supplicants to use birth control as and when too many children were being born.

In fact what the EU did do in the financial crisis was save the economies of Greece, Spain, and Portugal by agreeing financial bailouts and restricting their spending.

Core principals are what you represent as a Union its aim and purpose. The reason for being if you like. I know many wish it didn't exist but imagine for a moment a modern Europe without it.