As I understand it, Cameron didn't tell "his people" not to bother with a back up plan, but, told the Civil Service (they should be policy rather than politically driven) not to bother with a back up plan, as this (nonsensically IMO) would look like leaving was a real option and offer it support rather than him thinking staying in was a done deal.

A subtle difference, but, plain daft

theresa with abit more news today for us

aiming to come out of the single market

I like the idea of crushing the EU into tiny pieces.

She is going to deliver what the majority of voters wanted, which you can't hold against her.

Managed migration = no free movement of services/goods. If that's what the Germans want they can have it.

You mean like the unelected Cameron, Brown, Blair ...

We do not elect our PM in this country.

Cant agree with that.
Nobody voted for May to be leader of the Countr but, everyone, who voted at the time, knew that we wre getting Blair & Cameron, as they were the leader of the party that won most parliamentary seats.
Of course, when we cast our vote, it's to elect a local member of parliament and not directly for the leader but, I dont think that you can say that nobody voted these people in.
May, of course, was only elected by her party.

I think that there is an element of posturing in May's speech today.
She has to paint her position as black and white and then await the response of our "friends" in the EU.

It will be very interesting if The EU play "hard ball".
To potentially take a risk with The UK largest and closest trading ally is utterly bonkers.
I know that the same could be said of The EU but, we (the UK) are putting them in a position whereby they wont allow a free trade deal, if only to deter other members from leaving the EU.
Sure it will cost them but, I'm not sure what choice they have.

The EU survives via high taxation and spending. May's prime threat it to cut UK taxes to such levels that the EU cannot survive in its current form.

Yes, I understand the theory.
However, with the UK being such huge net importer, i'm not sure that the cards are stacked in our favour and we're "falling out" with our largest and nearest customer and supply base and there is a fundamental argument, which EVERY politician has publicly ignored and that is IF the UK is successful in negotiating favourable trade deals with the rest of the world (outside the EU) and we cut our raw material costs substantially, where are we intending to sell our new low cost products ?

There is now way whatsoever that The EU will allow the UK to sell cheap products into the euro zone if these are made using "cut price" imported products with lower (or zero) import tariffs from India, China etc if they are deemed to affect trade within The EU.

So therefore, we MAY be able to import some cheaper produce from outside the EU, which will be advantageous for domestic "consumption" but, then what ?

I know there is the argument about German cars etc but, what do people really think will happen.
Just imagine if the situation were reversed, we would do anything and everything to "get even" but, we are not the major player in all this.

Given we bought 2.7 million cars last year , I'd guess 2 million from Europe , at say an average 20K each , that's 40 billion a year , so 800 million pounds a week

Are they going to bang big tariffs on our exports ?

Yes, that's how the Common External Tariff works in the absence of single market membership. Non-preferential countries trading with the EU currently face a 10% tariff on car exports. The EU do it with plenty of other countries and this is our default position until a trade agreement is set up, once we leave the single market. From this point, a trade agreement takes years, with each EU member (and even some regions) having a veto over it. The EU Canada free trade agreement commenced negotiations in 2009 and has only been signed in the last few months, having narrowly avoided a veto by the regional government of Wallonia.

The whole idea is that the EU is economically stagnant and it is the UKs interests to attempt to sell to the areas of the world driving economic growth - eg India, China, SE Asia, North America and Middle East.

You've actually just made a good point for leaving , so a region of a small European country can stuff up lucrative deals for everybody else ? , that great Innit

Fine they can stick tariffs on stuff , and we'll just do the same , no worries

I quite enjoyed TRESemme's media appearance.

Not for the fact she looks like John Major's animated corpse sister.

Not even the vague objectives.

Just the fact she actually answered a question, albeit not regarding the subject at hand.

Some hack slipped in a question about a two state solution & she actually said the Yes word.

It's a funny old world.