EU, Paul, Lynton Crosby discussed on Talking Politics
Union with the EU. There was none of that. Can you disagree with the economic concessions on the issue because they're not his to give the only person you can make concessions as the rest of the year in particular miracles or what I mean by that is concessions to the arguments of the other side and domestic politics so in the Scottish referendum case famous pledge whatever you think about it long term consequences. It was a signal that he he heard the arguments the other side. I think he was able to do that because he passionately wanted his side to win and there is discussion in the memoirs again. I write about it that they talk about close to the vote. If there's a risk they think they you might be losing. Should they say something about immigration should they at least acknowledge some of what's driving the other side's arguments and Lynton crosby among other people according to Cameron advise against thinks that but in hindsight that doesn't look like the right cool no I mean I do think that the difference with Scottish referendum does matter because saying saying we hear you and then being able to absolutely nothing about it. I'm not sure that that really works as a political tactic. Just kind of in some sense reinforces the argument given that doesn't make any difference like why anybody politician says about this or if you do it in the last week you might get away with it. You know I think if he understood as well as he did the the weakness of Britain's membership than absolutely had to make contingency arrangements arrangements of some kind for leave winning the referendum now. He says it will take time that was spent on all the things things that he didn't intend to stay on so he didn't see any government would replace him or any place would accept those contingency although he now this seems to be the weakest part of his defense he thought he was down for three months and in those three months he would have done a lot of this kind of planning but it was taken away from him because and relied Samedan inopportune opportun remark about to resume his personal circumstances but in those three months what could he have done no knowledge. I think this goes I think to an issue that he doesn't on the face in that is that at the very moment in which the referendum happened in leave one we were in a constitutional crisis because the majority of the voting Electra and said they did not consent to pretty significant Paul the constitutional arrangements bug which this country is governed so for that to be the case and then for the prime minister to decide that morning even though he's person who's whose decision making hats porters to that moment that the thing that he's going to do is is walk away. I think that is is pretty hard to get what head of UNTO UNTO justify because as we set about several times before in the issue of prudence and acting Putin lie's fundamental part part of the only way we should British constitution can work and not is an active huge risk taking I think but you also think it's it's not just the walking away their lack of consideration of the possibility of this outcome beforehand what in the months leading up in the years in Europe it back if back in two thousand thirteen he he thought whether wilfully not that he was heading down that road he might be trapped on that road or he might want to get on that road but towards in out. You have to think about what out vote means. I need well. We didn't encourage. We're not saying either to do. We we think that the way that he tells the story at least I'm being hesitant because we don't know all the things that went on inside his head but.