We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
The Brexit vote has been an event of massive political importance, but… The Brexit vote has been an event of massive political importance, but what really fascinates me is that this has clearly not been a party political event.
The day before the vote I was chatting with a group of congenial LEAVE campaigners in Dover, and they were evenly split between Labour and Tory supporters. And as we nattered, the nastiest things I heard said about Corbyn were from the self-described Labourites… and the cattiest remarks about Cameron came from the self-described Tories… and both groups laughed as they listened to the others trashing the leaders of their own parties, as if it was a competition who could heap more expletives on their own nominal leaders. I must confess I have never seen the like in all my years.
The long term fallout from this will be very interesting indeed.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Head Boy David Cameron will be out by October – as will his toady Gideon Osborne.
Mr Corbyn has failed to do the honourable thing and has refused to resign – if Labour is going to get him out they will have to carry him out (kicking and screaming).
Let there be no mistake about this – the pro Corbyn people DID (not did not) campaign hard for “Remain”.
Every pro E.U. leaflet I came upon was a Labour leaflet, and every pro E.U. poster was a Labour poster.
I know because it said “Labour” on them – as Patrick knows I am good at spotting the obvious (details rarely interest me).
Mr Jeremy Cobyn is not a democratic socialist – the last thing he wants is for the people to able to get rid of a “Progressive” government.
The E.U. did not go as far as he wanted (certainly not) – but it did push policy in his direction.
The control of society by an elite of “educated” administrators ruling for “the good of the people” (like the rulers of “The New Atlantis” by Francis Bacon, or the 13 Departments of State proposed by Jeremy Bentham).
Like Professor Harold Laski in the 1940s (Chairman of the Labour Party – but denounced as mentally unbalanced by Prime Minister Clement Atlee) or the regime in Venezuela now – Comrade Jeremy does NOT want the people to be able to reject a “Progressive” government.
Old fashioned patriotic Labour Party people – who admire Winston Churchill, the Battle of Britain and all that….
They are not Corbyn people at all.
Yes, also my experience. This was absolutely not split along the usual party political lines. It shows how out of touch with the country the political establishment are, as the only PARTY (as opposed to pro-Brexit people within anti-Brexit parties) who actually called it was UKIP.
In THEORY Farage is a bit-part player, a nobody with an insignificant Parliamentary party. But in FACT, he just turned the world over on its side, because without him this referendum would have never happened. Even if he never achieves another thing in his entire life, beyond buying a round of beers in a pub: he won. He won because his vision for Britain is the one that prevailed, and his was the only PARTY calling for it.
I hope that the Brexit is part of a larger zeitgeist, much like 1989, when the global ruling classes find themselves unclothed, dethroned, irrelevant. UK leads the way!
FTSE and DJIA already at or above their close Thursday evening, when the smart money was all on Remain. Apparently, the world will not collapse after all.
llater,
llamas
From a random American: Happy independence day, England. Good luck!
The issues with the Labour Party merely highlight again the divide that has been discussed here before at length, namely, between the small cadre of Labour leaders vs the vast majority of Labour voters. If this has shown the voters the true direction of the party’s leaders, that can only be a good thing – but I doubt it, it’s not like the divide has not been obvious for generations, for those who want to see it.
llater,
llamas
Do you suppose that now the EU will try to punish the UK, perhaps through being churlish and vindictive during the Article 50 negotiations?
It seems to me that they cannot allow the UK to appear to benefit from Brexit, not with so many other “exit”s waiting in the wings. Therefore they must try to make sure that the UK apprehends some sort of injury from its decision.
Could we bottle some of that and import it for our pharoah-worshipping apes in yankeeland?
Ferox: the EU is a paper tiger and there is very little they can meaningfully do without hoisting themselves on their own petards.
Free movement of people, money and merchandise across Europe’s borders is a GOOD thing. Also a unified currency.
The bureaucratic-parasitic, huge and stifling supra-structure built by the EU is bad. The GOOD thing (free movement) can, in logic, exist without the bureaucracy.
Maybe that will happen.
Still, it’s been good to see Remainers on social media being so gracious in defeat, recognising the fundamental equality of the democratic process, and generally not coming across as hateful liberal fascists. And Brexiters up and down the country coming out of the voting booth closet assured of respect and equal social treatment.
I was really worried that might happen, so refreshing that there is zero sign of it literally everywhere!
@ Jacob – free movement of money and merchandise is a wonderful thing. Of people – maybe not so much.
A unified currency is not required, and will inevitably bring the political meddling that characterizes the Euro – which is not a medium of exchange, but a political tool. What is required is only that governments stay out of the issue of exchange rates altogether, and let people exchange different currencies as they see fit.
llater,
llamas
Jacob, The free movement of people across Europe’s borders is NOT a good thing at all. If anything it was uncontrolled immigration that gave the lead campaign such impetus. Ordinary people suffer when such huge numbers are on the move, their infrastructure suffers (houses, schools, hospital, GPs and roads), their jobs go, and if they are lucky enough to keep their job, their wages are compressed. A unified currency necessitates political union and that is what is completely unacceptable. You are looking at things from a logical and idealistic point of view. The problem is that humans get in the way, and British humans want to conduct their own affairs in their way and under their laws made by their parliament. That is why we voted Brexit yesterday.
It would be better still to have no government-created-and-manipulated currencies at all. So, I don’t see how (say) 20 different government-created-and-manipulated currencies is better than one. If you don’t have many currencies, you don’t need many exchange rates, free or otherwise.
Jacob, having 20 different government-created-and-manipulated currencies is better than having just one, for the simple reason that the market determines their relative values (via exchange rates) and forces at least a modicum of discipline on those manipulating governments. Fiat currencies aren’t good, but that’s the world we live in. Given that, having a free market in them, to provide options to the users, is a second-best alternative.
Jacob, it is much easier to accept a wage cut through a cut in the value of the currency in which you are paid, than through an actual nominal reduction. Given that different areas of Europe (or any area) have different levels of productivity, having a currency for each area will allow wages to go up and down with productivity. This is why unemployment in Greece is in double digits. Youth unemployment is 50% I believe.
Of course, by this logic the US should also have lots of different currencies, and indeed it could; but there people can move to where the jobs are, since there is no language barrier.
Immigration is a good thing, but when you have lots of public resources to which access is not restricted, increased competition for the use of such is bound to create friction. This has been discussed ad infinitum on various immigration threads on this site, so I’m not going to go into it any more than that.
“Immigration is a good thing”
Of course.
Especially since you have a graying, declining and non-reproducing population. Somebody needs to do the work needed to support all the pensioners. Somebody needs to man the jobs in the factories, service branch and health care…
On my side of the pond I am seeing something similar, with our two wonderful likely nominees for US President.
One crack I heard was a bit amusing: “It’s like the dog saying to the cat, ‘You don’t know how to drive, so let me do it.’ ”
I’ve never heard such low enthusiasm for a pair of nominees.
To the Brits today: Happy 4th of July! (about a week too soon, though, guys..)
Realistically speaking, though, I am stocking up on popcorn in preparation for watching the political sh*tstorms about to unfold. Good Luck.
Jacob writes, as can be applied particularly for Germany:
Why cannot some of the rest of the EU move to: work to support and man the jobs, as needed WRT Germany? Surely that is at least part of the purpose of the original “free movement of labour”: to allow movement of workers throughout the EU to staff the job vacancies that exist, where they exist.
What need then would there be for immigrants (probably less appropriately skilled) from more distant countries (Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, northern Africa, etc)?
Best regards
Increasingly robots I imagine. It is happening anyway.
With the end result at about 50:50, those with historical knowledge like me will recall this was always the case on both sides of the political spectrum, the question is why we had all major parties on one side only for so long? Perhaps this will change, and who will jump first?
48:52 on a very high turn out, which makes that quite a convincing win.
Because the EU gravy train only sold tickets to people willing to play ball.
Good question indeed. Boris is a bit of a weathervane but his decision to back LEAVE shows he figured out what Cameron et al did not, which is to say there was a major “market opportunity” crying out to be serviced. Farage, along with everything he represented, could not be wished away or banished with contempt and sneers (which in fact made Farage stronger: I have always wondered if Jackart was actually a UKIP false flag 😀 ), no matter how much the Wets running Conservative Central Office wanted that to be true.
“I have always wondered if Jackart was actually a UKIP false flag ” – No he’s just a monumental wanker.
Because the EU gravy train only sold tickets to people willing to play ball.
I’m not so sure about this, it all smacks of the “the wrong lizard might get in” attitude, money cannot be the only thing behind it all.
Take poor old Corbyn, you have to feel a little sorry for him – well maybe not – but here’s an arch Bennite who distrusted the anti-democratic business elitist Europe, a man who came to power based on his principals, and he had to glumly accept the party line of Remain, and he didn’t half show his disappointment, like a teenager being asked to appear in a family photo with grandma. And to cap it all he’s now getting chucked out, even though it was the result he wanted all along!
Mind you, a bunch of arch socialists firmly on the Leave side would have made my vote the hardest ever to cast.
Do you suppose that now the EU will try to punish the UK, perhaps through being churlish and vindictive during the Article 50 negotiations?
They might try to. We actually need EU member governments to ratify the UK’s leaving terms if we are to leave properly (I think this is part of the Article 50 rules). That may not happen if we don’t get agreement. But in that case the UK will simply say ‘Stuff you’ and leave anyway (assuming the EU even exists in two years time).
The British tiger has been re-awoken. People who haven’t voted for decades have come out to vote for this. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle. The EU is now a part of history, not the future. The youngsters who are crying about this will soon cheer up and embrace it once they realize most of what they want actually doesn’t depend on the EU at all.
Lion. British Lion 😉
>Take poor old Corbyn, you have to feel a little sorry for him
I do feel sort of sorry for him, because for once in his life he told the truth (about immigration in the EU), and for once he actually was in touch with real Labour traditional heartland voters, rather than the Islington luvvy-academic-media set, and the students and activist members who voted him in. And now he’s being punished for it.
I do hope he clings on, but only because it helps Labour become irrelevant. McDonnell is even more left-wing than him, but he’s much more ruthless, and I suspect more effective in terms of organization. Corbyn has a bit of the old gentleman about him (relatively speaking, at least). That certainly doesn’t apply to McDonnell, but McDonnell will perhaps be a more effective performer. And Tom Watson, although he’s a charmless a-hole and no great vote-winner, would bring some credibility back to what is currently a hopeless old 70’s Trot nostalgia tour.
There were some pretty significant fractures inside the UK, though. How is that going to play out? Will we actually see Scotland leave and join the EU?
>>The British tiger has been re-awoken
>
>Lion. British Lion 😉
I don’t remember Blake writing about lions?
But yes, I suppose lions are more appropriate than tigers. Even if they do make you think of ‘Beefy’ Botham, ‘Lamby’ Lamb, ‘Goochy’ Gooch (or whatever the hell Gooch’s nickname was), ‘Smithy’ Smith, ‘Tub of Lard’ Gatting, and all the other boorish but patriotic cricketing heroes of the 80’s. They may all be embarrassing outdated jingoistic Toby Jugs, but at least they didn’t sell out their country (or — *cough Effricans cough* — the country they first sold out to) for a bit of BBC luvvy approval, like the following crisp-pushing tax-sucking jellybacks did:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2016/06/24/british-sports-stars-reacts-to-the-news-that-david-cameron-will/
Mind you, that leaves about 9992 UK sports stars who are probably loving this day.
Indeed, but the point I am making is these ‘significant fractures’ do not reflect the usual party political divides.
I expect the Scotland issue will prove to be a non-issue as in reality, the calculus regarding the Scotland-England relationship has actually changed very little as things stand now. With the UK and an independent Scotland sharing a border with both in the EU… well to all intents and purposes there is no meaningful border in economic terms. But with the UK and an independent Scotland sharing a border with Scotland in the EU and England NOT in the EU, that means there really is a meaningful border, with all the economic problems for Scotland that might imply. It also means Scotland would probably have to adopt the Euro, and also apply to join the EU separately. It would not be a simple matter.
Hmmm … not so fast, you guys.
Firstly the political back peddling and spin is already kicking in. The politicians are trotting out the usual “We failed to get the message across …” which in layman’s terms means “You thicko’s don’t understand that your Lords and Masters know what is best for you and you made the wrong decision”. I’m convinced that if only three people in the whole country voted, the winners would declare that they got 66% of the vote and the loser declare that they only lost by one vote (Florida and hanging chads, anyone?). They wouldn’t get the message that the entire country is fed up of them. This is a similar example or a case in point.
Secondly, Britain can be shafted in a number of ways. Firstly the legislation needed to leave the EU must be voted through parliament and there is already talk about the pro-EU MP’s diluting and delaying the exit legislation so it may be more of a divorce than a separation (with the consequent alimony …). Next, the choice of the negotiators is a thorny subject. Camoron (nope – the moron bit is an integral part of the mans character) is so pro-EU that he could not credibly handle the negotiations. It will need a strong minded person to deal with the BS that will be tried by the EU. Camoron will stay until mid October – the party conferences take place then when the business of selecting a new PM will take place – and parliament will close down for the summer recess shortly. So he’s effectively PM until a successor can be chosen. Only then can negotiations be thought of and the inevitable delay while a strategy is worked out and the new guy gets up to speed will be a further delay. But the divisions within the Conservative party over the EU are so great that this will, IMHO, cause the party to implode and cease to exist as a viable party. The rank and file party members (i.e. people who “register” in USA terms as Conservatives and who raise cash, deliver leaflets and act as unpaid promoters of the party) have been leaving in hordes for a while now and they are diametrically opposed to the way the party has been drifting will not support a shattered and uneffective party. Their natural “home” is with UKIP and I can see that UKIP will be the natural choice for these people.
Britain COULD invoke article 50 (which allows members to leave and if the negotiations are not completed within 2 years it s an automatic leave) BUT if they don’t then there is no time limit on the negotiations. Let’s assume a nice round number … say 100 years? And of course, until agreement is reached, the cash payments, immigration etc. is still in force BUT the EU is likely to prevent Britain voting or having any say in decisions (not that they do anyway ..).
Mary Ellen Synon (http://mesynon.blogspot.co.nz/) has three articles in particular which relate to this. Earliest first:
http://mesynon.blogspot.co.nz/2016/06/how-cameron-and-commons-will-overturn.html
http://mesynon.blogspot.co.nz/2016/06/the-french-elite-see-their-privileges.html
http://mesynon.blogspot.co.nz/2016/06/party-today-but-we-are-not-safe-yet.html
The haggis Munchers (Scotland), although only about 4 to 5 million of the population voted solidly for remain and you could never mistake a Scot with a grievance for anything else. Wee Jimmy Crankie (Nicola Sturgeon) is moaning about “England” booting Scotland out of the EU. I suppose if Scotlands votes kept the UK in the EU the rest of the 65 million people should accept it … However, the whingeing bar stewards are demanding ANOTHER Scottish independence referendum and leave the UK to join the EU … can’t see the sense in that but hatred of the English is their only thing that motivates the haggis munchers and gets them out of bed in the mornings. As evidence, I present the wisdom of Renton from the film Trainspotting.
IF the Scots REALLY, REALLY wanted to be independent, then they would have taken the position that as the break up of the UK affected the whole of the UK, then everyone should have a say in the matter. The English would have voted overwhelmingly to boot the moaning faced sods out. Wearing skirts (Kilts), no underwear and having spiky thistles 3 foot high may account for their dour attitude. One good thing about Scottish independence is that we could throw Tony Blair out of England and get shot of the bar steward. That is one person that needs an appointment with a rope, a lamp post and a crowd of the electorate …
My point is, the problems of Scotland agitating and making a nuisance of themselves will have to be handled and this is an additional distraction that is unwanted at a crucial time like this. PLEASE, I urge you, DO NOT recommend that the Roman wall be rebuilt – the bulk of Northumberland is north of the Roman wall and you would cede my birthplace to the Scots …
So Britain has spoken. Is anyone in the political establishment listening?
Nah, more likely Boris takes over, negotiates an exit and basks in the glory of being on the winning side, and the Tories all tactfully forget any of them were ever against Brexit in the first place.
Perry de Havilland (London): “I expect the Scotland issue will prove to be a non-issue”
It is worth noting that while some areas were very close (my point of origin – Moray – was 49.9% leave, 50.1% remain), two most extreme areas for remain (East Dumbartonshire and East Renfrewshire) were also two most extreme for NO in the September 2014 indyref. These people were voting for NO a second time, not for Remain, having been told by all the elites in Scotland that a leave vote would fracture the UK. As regards East Dumbartonshire, I speak from personal knowledge of several of them. I tried to explain that voting leave was the way to avoid problems, by bringing Scottish and southern results into closer alignment, but it was an uphill struggle against the unanimous advice of he Scottish establishment that they way to avoid talk of a second indyref was to vote remain. As we now see, they proved to be just as right about that as the UK-wide establishment were about the more general issues. If all the people who thought they were voting NO to any talk of a second indyref had voted Leave, there would now be no talk of it.
Like Perry, I think this issue may die just as soon as Sturgeon checks the polls, the current Scottish economic figures and the realities of the EU’s eagerness to add another S to PIIGS.
Phil B, we could always rebuild the Antonine Wall then, and keep the bits south
>But the divisions within the Conservative party over the EU are so great that this will, IMHO, cause the party to implode and cease to exist as a viable party
If they had any shame, it would. I wish it were so. But they don’t have any shame. So we aren’t rid of the Cons yet.
>Secondly, Britain can be shafted in a number of ways. Firstly the legislation needed to leave the EU must be voted through parliament and there is already talk about the pro-EU MP’s diluting and delaying the exit legislation so it may be more of a divorce than a separation (with the consequent alimony …).
Pro-Remain forces could, and will, try to scupper things. But, fortunately, things will not be that easy for them. And if they try to screw us, we’ll just say bye-bye. Thewre’s always the WTO rules to fall back on.
>Firstly the legislation needed to leave the EU must be voted through parliament
No, the PM just needs to invoke Article 50 of the EU Constitution.
>the choice of the negotiators is a thorny subject. Camoron (nope – the moron bit is an integral part of the mans character) is so pro-EU that he could not credibly handle the negotiations
As he’s resigning, why would he handle the negotiations? The idea that Boris Johnson or Theresa May or whoever would use Cameron to handle the negotiations is insane.
>the divisions within the Conservative party over the EU are so great that this will, IMHO, cause the party to implode and cease to exist as a viable party.
I wish.
>Britain COULD invoke article 50 (which allows members to leave and if the negotiations are not completed within 2 years it s an automatic leave) BUT if they don’t then there is no time limit on the negotiations. Let’s assume a nice round number … say 100 years?
The EU is crumbling before our eyes. In 100 years it will barely rate a mention in the history textbooks.
>My point is, the problems of Scotland agitating and making a nuisance of themselves will have to be handled and this is an additional distraction that is unwanted at a crucial time like this.
The good news is that the ludicrous demands for another Scots referendum are not being consdiered to be relevant to the UK leaving the EU.
>So Britain has spoken. Is anyone in the political establishment listening?
At the moment they all are. The result has — glory to God/Allah/Buddha — been accepted. Fait accompli. I was worried beforehand that a Leave result would be fudged, but the scaremongering insistence by the Tories and the EU that a Leave vote really means Leave has turned out in our favour. Any attempt now to oveturn this result would mean gun battles on the street. But that won’t happen. Even the despairing luvvies recognize that the result is final.
To all – I sincerely hope that I am wrong but my bitter, twisted, cynical and curmudgeonly nature suspects and expects the worst. My apologies for pouring cold water on the mood but the battle has been won, the war is not!
The Conservative party has been bullied and threatened by the Cameronian equivalent of the “Gang of Four” over the subject of Europe (which has in over the last 30 or so years deeply divided the party) that this will, again IMHO, be the final straw.
Now that Britain has voted to leave, the lies peddled in the lead up to the referendum will come home to roost. One in particular, Turkey being accepted into the EU, is likely to loom large over the next week or so. Rumour has it that the EU have the subject scheduled for next Thursday … so immediately one lie Camoron has said will be immediately disproved. The “Snakes on Planes”, ingrowing toenails, hemorrhoids afflicting all and sundry, mass unemployment (yadda, yadda, yadda etc. and so forth ad infinitum) will, in the coming weeks, not eventuate and the Remain lies will be demonstrated for what they are. The longer the better as far as any repeat referendum goes.
Both the population and the Conservative party will turn on the Remainers and the in fighting within the party will make the night of the long knives seem like a vicars tea party. They will fight like two ferrets in a sack. I have 5 quid to a pinch of pig shit that says the party will cease to exist as a viable entity by the party conference season. Certainly the ordinary members are most likely to be natural leavers and the way the leadership has conducted the remain campaign will irritate them to the point of mass desertion of the party. UKIP will, again, in my opinion will gain a lot of new members in the coming months.
Bo Jo is a weathercock and will point whichever way the wind blows (so a typical politician, then). I think he correctly predicted the mood of the country and is set to capitalise on it but taking over the remains of the Conservative party will be like being made Commander in Chief of the Argentinian Air Force after the Falklands war. The square root of naff all is still naff all.
Span Ows – rebuilding the Antonine wall with plenty of technology to detect any attempts to breach the line would be acceptable to a Northumbrian and a Border Reiver er … not sure how the Scottish Borderers and Reivers would view being part of England though … >};o)
“I have 5 quid to a pinch of pig shit that says the party will cease to exist as a viable entity by the party conference season.”
Phil B, I would take that bet if I knew (1) exactly how much a “pinch” of pig shit is, and (2) whether there is some way to ship it from the US to England in the unlikely event I should lose (my guess is that shit-shipping violates some customs rule or other). Can you help me out?
Phil B
There is an indication in the Treaty of Lisbon that the invoking Article 50 by a Member State (i.e a diplomatic communication tot the European Council, not an Act of Parliament) triggers the path to exit within 2 years, unless an extended period is agreed (i.e we can still be shafted), but once the UK government communicates the intention to leave, the 2 year period (+ any extension) kicks in regardless of Parliament or anything else. The treaty is still in force and the act of parliament enforcing it would remain ‘law”, but discharged, like an act allowing a railway to be built remains upon completion of the railway.
An Act of Parliament to revoke the treaties and confirm the supremacy of Parliament wouls be another method, potentailly faster but much harder politically to enact.
Merkel said it best:
“the German chancellor called for Brussels to maintain “close future relations” with Britain. ”
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/683054/EU-referendum-Brexit-Leave-Germany-Angela-Merkel
Some adjustments will, maybe, be adopted, but not much will change. Close relations between Britain and Europe will continue, as they benefit both sides.
It was very gratifying to contemplate Cameron’s bloody nose, but beyond this I doubt that much will change.
But from the BBC:
The European Union is no more necessary than the former Union of Southern Slavs, aka ‘Yugoslavia’ was in its day.
As much as I see Jean-Claude Juncker just itching to stick it to the U.K., it’s a German E.U. now and I have a felling they’ll rein him in as they need the trade now more than ever.
That both the Conservative and Labour parties have remainers and brexiters shows that the parties are misaligned. As computer geeks – and Excel users – might say, they’re in the wrong sort order.
Briefly, the current British political order arose as an early twentieth century response to nineteenth century industrialisation and the resulting relationship between capital and labour. The Labour Party – the name says it all – spoke for the working classes and the Conservative Party represented the middle and upper classes. Then the Berlin Wall fell.
I remember reading an article written not long afterwards, in 1990, observing the old struggle between labour and capital was over and we were now all capitalists. In future, it argued, the dividing line in British politics would be the country’s relationship with Europe. It went on to speculate that, by about 2005, the Labour and Conversative parties would have been replaced by the Britain First and European parties, or whatever they chose to call themselves. Of course, that never happened, hence the paradox of remainers and brexiters in both parties. Of course, UKIP did make an heroic effort to change things in the way predicted by that article, but was denied the success it deserved by Britain’s first past the post electoral system.
I think JD has it right.
@Laird,
“A pinch of pigshit” is worthless so the expression means, in effect, that I am so confident of winning the bet that I’m willing to risk the cash.
It is, shall we say, an pithy and very earthy way of saying it is a virtually 100% certainty. >};o)
OK, Phil B. I’ll take your “bet”, and if the Conservative party remains “a viable entity by the party conference season” I’ll email you my address so you can send me the 5 quid.
Thanks.
@Laird – you are on! >};o)
No, don’t bring Cameron within a mile (or 1.62 km) of the negotiating table. He backed the wrong side and will come to with a mouthful of lemons, albeit EU approved lemons.