Ripley

I'm maybe in denial but I suspect and hope we may not end up leaving the EU - the British are not Russians in the sense that they won't put up with economic hardship just to follow an idea or principle - our pragmatic streak will kick in pretty quickly and then Boris and friends will be swept away in a wave of discontent. This is why I think the conservatives are finished. They have massively overestimated how much the public actually care about the EU. It's austerity that has caused this mess, not the EU. The EU is fundamentally flawed though. Junker should go but he is not accountable to national electorates and there you have the basic flaw. Any other "president" who oversaw the loss of a member state would resign or be held to account in some way - but he's untouchable. Junker never even visited the uk during his presidential campaign - again that should be unthinkable - like Clinton not bothering to visit California during her campaign.

I'm still reeling from the chaos. I voted remain in the hope the UK could contribute to the EU reform process which is now inevitable. It's such a shame we've put ourselves in this hideous position. There is something stirring in the UK but it's not faccism. The political parties as we know them are finished. The conservatives don't realise it yet but they're finished. The Labour Party is also finished and is in the midst of committing suicide as I write. The truth is people are waiting for someone to inspire some kind of authentic and manageable change but we're stuck with the most mediocre set of politicians anywhere in the western world. I guess Europe is frustrated but there's no point in talking to a country that is so schizophrenic at the moment.

It's certainly not Germany's fault the EU is fractured and disheartened at the present time. The EU project is drifting and that is a collective responsibility to fix. Ideology has driven the EU ahead of what people are willing to accept in the UK, Germany and elsewhere. It time to step back and reimagine the project along more pragmatic and democratic lines. Nobody objects to supporting poorer countries but the EU can,t just be a wealth transfer union. People in north and west Europe need to see the value in the EU also and it's not very apparent what the benefits are. The EU doesn't fund big infrastructure and transformational projects in the UK and neither should they, however, people are asking why when the bulk of EU funding and activity is concentrated in south and east Europe why so many of them come here to work - something isn't working properly. The UK is a small collection of Islands and there are 65 million people squeezed on to them, rising to 72 million by 2030 on current trends. We may be the largest population in the EU by then. British people wonder how long we should live with unchecked population growth which is affecting our quality of life and environment. The EU has no answer to that other than a slight change to benefit entitlements for EU citizens who come here. I will be voting to stay in but I want to see fundamental change.

I think its also easy to see why Germans are mystified by this referendum - years of benefiting from an under valued currency leading to an export boom and economic growth. This is not the experience of the vast majority of Europeans inside and outside of the Euro zone. For most people Europe is a miserable place at the moment in terms of personal and national fortunes. The German experience is warped and out of synch with just about everyone else. Don't get me wrong, Germany has earned its success - but not all of it... The refugee crisis need to be viewed in that context too.

That's certainly part of why the referendum is happening, but its not as simple as that. I think the reaction of the Brits to the EU is just politics catching up with economics, as it is in the rest of the EU where there is also deep dissatisfaction. The financial shock of the "great recession" has changed the way people look at the EU - they feel disempowered by it and estranged from its decisions. The answer is not to leave though and I will certainly be voting to stay in. If other Europeans think this is just UK exceptionalism and egocentricity they are very wrong - its not how it feels to me at least. I am glad we're asking the question, but I'm very afraid of the answer. The EU needs to change into a core of Eurozone countries and those outside who have a kind of associate membership. This needs to be done soon and in a way which people will recognise it when it happens. The Eurozone countries need to effectively pool their democracy and live with the consequences and the others need to support that process (inc the UK).

Not so much a commercial but a promo by the BBC in the build up to the London 2012 opening ceremony. The short version; long version and the torch promo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ViLiXA0E70 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cVrjFlt4hI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc59QAKR20I The BBC did an excellent job of setting the right tone for the Games and building up a sense of anticipation.

I think this is brilliant - a sporting event being awarded to a place where they actually like the sport... who'd have thought! I think smaller cities are perfect for the IAAFs - there's a limited amount of accommodation needed and only 1 main stadium. I would like to see other mid sized / regional cities get a chance to shine like Eugene. I always thought Sheffield should have been allowed to host the 2005 champs when London withdrew... it had all the facilities, just not much of an international profile.

This does beg the question as to what would trigger a boycott or removal of a host by FIA or its members? Would the invasion of Eastern Ukraine qualify; what about the invasion of the whole of Ukraine? How many civilian aircraft need to be blown out of the sky before FIFA would react to events on the ground. I suspect if sanctions bite and reduce Russia's ability to pay FIFA oodles of cash then they would be more inclined to move the tournament somewhere else.

I'm just not that bothered about visiting Russia - its big and has an interesting history but it just seems so unwelcoming and on a par with Iran in terms of relations with the West. I wouldn't feel safe there. These assertions about political stability are just hilarious... we'll see how stable it is as the Russian economy stagnates and Putin runs out of petro-dollars to pay off his cronies and suppress dissent...

Wonder if they'll be holding matches in Donetsk....

That's not the Queen... she's smiling.. and she's wearing a tea cosy instead of a crown I think you could now use the shard skyscraper as a kind of giant javelin in a new logo - don't think it was finished in 2012 - or perhaps the London eye as a discuss.. just a couple of casual musings...

@Alex Think you're being a little harsh on Malaysia - it took a massive international effort to find the wreckage (if indeed it has definitely been found). Given that it was totally off its flight path and in the middle of the most remote part of planet earth I think any country would have been at a loss to find it without a combined effort. At least they held press conferences and released information more or less as they got it... would China have been so open and transparent (doubt it). Of course the scenes with distraught relatives were hard to watch but lets face it this was never going to end well.

The Qatari press release about this is just laughable... who is doing their PR? I mean by now they must be self aware enough to realise that their rep is corrupt as hell. There is no way that they should be saying anything along the lines of "private individual's transactions blah blah.." they should be saying that they are asking the Telegraph for all the information they have on this so theirs and FIFAs ethics committees can take it into consideration as part of the ongoing investigations or something similar. Otto Bismark once said - "fools learn from their mistakes, but a wise man learns from the mistakes of others"... FIFA didn't learn from the IOC's Salt Lake scandal and haven't even learned from their catalogue of mistakes with the 2022 bid process.... they're not even in a category with fools... they're total tw@ts.

I suspect this will all be played out by the time the 2018 WC comes around. Putin will make sure that his foreign policy calms down in advance of the Russian WC. Mind you if Russia has international economic sanctions imposed this could severely hamper the construction of the WC infrastructure... which will need to be ramped up and on track from now if it is to be ready in time.

The UK Government is currently funding the planning stages of High Speed 2 which is a new line from London to Northern England. It will be built in 2 phases; phase 1 from London to Birmingham and phase 2 from Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds, with a spur being built to Heathrow. Eventually it would be extended to Edinburgh and Glasgow. There is a webpage about it: www.hs2.org.uk Its proving quite controversial since it will plough its way through some very wealthy areas including Counties which the Conservative Party rely on for support, so I'm surprised they've gone ahead with it tbh. Construction will commence in 2017 with the whole route finished and open to passengers by 2032.

Really quite pleasantly surprised by Sochi. Wasn't the all out Putin w@nk-fest I thought it would be. Russia showed us her softer side. Mind you with the Olympics out of the way I bet Putin goes back to his old ways.... just waiting for Russia to invade the Crimea now.

I'm frankly surprised that any country with a shred of self respect would spend any money bidding for a WC. FIFA has surely proved itself to be no better than a corrupt, 3rd world dictatorship... next Sep will be mining diamonds in the Congo to give to one of Berlusconni's teen-harem. They'll award the WC to the girl with the biggest t1ts, I think that until FIFA is run by people with integrity, rather than a bunch of mediocre has-beens with Swiss bank accounts then the WC should be left for Putin-esque angry-midget dictators to use as a propaganda willy-waving event.

I think one thing is for sure, unless Sepp has a stroke and falls from a great height onto Jack Warner while carrying the world cup trophy and a suitcase full of faberge eggs and gold ingots....then we're not going to see an English bid or hosting this side of 2040.

I see what your saying, but she does "actually" leave the country to govern itself in the sense that she is head of the police and armed forces and if she had a crazy notion to overthrow parliament "in theory" the Queen could get the privy council to take control of the country by force. The key to parliament's power is that it holds the purse strings and makes the laws which make the Queen the legitimate head of state...its a balance of power.

I'm sure the Queen does attract some tourists to the UK... god knows its not the weather... but I don't think the royal family are any more figures of intrigue than say Barrack Obama and the "first family". Maybe we take our history and tradition for granted in the UK because we're constitutionally so stable/secure. As far as the Queen goes she fulfills her role and holds the country together as a figure to rally around in tough times. She leaves the country to democratically govern itself and make its own decisions... without the distractions of having constitutional upheaval....what more could you ask for?

I really don't see the monarchy being replaced in the UK...its not on the political agenda at all and "in general" there's no appetite among the public at large for any change. The British monarchy has no real power and essentially fulfills the same role as any other constitutional monarchy around Europe, whether that be Spain, Sweden or the Netherlands. Its not about the personalities involved, its having a benign institution which denies absolute power to everyone else, whether that be the military or politicians. For Canada and the other "Dominions", the challenge is to maintain that status quo but at the same time to put some distance between the realities of today, and the perceived stigma of political and /or cultural inferiority towards a country, thousands of miles away, with little in the way of political or cultural leadership to offer in the modern world... and no desire to be in that position in any case, despite our silly escapade into Iraq. I just think that you should just do it and stop kidding yourselves that how much you like the person wearing the crown has anything to do with it. Its the institution and the role it plays in your society in maintaining stability that you need to concentrate on. I suppose there's a lot to loose if you get it wrong, so you shouldn't be distracted by how much you like or dislike the Queen or her heirs and focus on what you put in place of the monarchy.

Sounds like you've tied yourselves up in a whole lot of red tape there.... good luck! Maybe the Queen could make it easier for you by punching a Mountie, kicking a beaver and spitting on a maple leaf on prime time TV... just a thought!

Well I think thats unavoidable, however, a move to an Irish style presidency would not be such a huge leap and will preserve Canada as a parliamentary democracy. I've never understood why Australia has failed to make that change. I know these things are never straight forward but it would seem like a natural progression from a constitutional monarchy to having an elected, largely non-political head of state. I really don't see how Canada will change all that dramatically by ditching the Queen as head of state, or why Canadians need to be concerned about such a change; unless its more about fearing US cultural, political and cultural domination...in which case I think that jig was up some decades ago.

LOL! Well I'm not trying to upset anyone... but I think in the long term what I've said is true. I think that there's no point in focusing on the queen or the monarchy as a problem; these countries have their destiny in their own hands and they need to get on and resolve the fact that they have a foreign head of state, to their own satisfaction. I can totally respect the fact that they want their own head of state to open Olympics or whatever and I agree that having a Governor General representing a country is a bit "second best". But its not about "rejecting" the British monarchy, its about choosing something which works for them....and to be honest they all seem a bit lost for ideas.

To be honest its a mystery to most Brits why the queen is still head of state of these far off lands with which we have less and less in common. Its just an historic anachronism. Its clear that Britain's future is with Europe, and Canada with the US, economically and culturally. I guess Australia and NZ will eventually become more allied with south east Asia and China. There's very few people who give two hoots about the Commonwealth, its a total irrelevance today and is just a glorified charity that dispenses aid and technical help to third world members. When the Queen dies, the Commonwealth is likely to die with her. Margaret Thatcher once said that the Commonwealth was made up of countries with nothing in common and no wealth... I think she hit the nail on the head. The fact of the matter is that there's nothing the Queen, Britain or the monarchy in general can do to resolve these quirks of history. Its up to the people of AUS, Can and NZ etc to make their own choices at a time which suits them....meanwhile we just have to wait until they get their sh1t together and have the courage of their convictions.