Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is there life after Brexit?

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited August 5 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is there life after Brexit?

I don’t, unlike Dominic Cummings, think that No Deal is unstoppable. Parliament can stop it if it wants to. But let’s suppose that Mr Johnson succeeds in taking us out of the EU on October 31. Let’s further assume that he calls an election soon afterwards. 

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,131
    "Nick Palmer was Labour MP for Broxtoer, 1997-2010"

    And got his article rejected by Labourlist!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 59,526
    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,131
    Lab manifesto: Re-nationalise everything

    LD manifesto: legalise Weed

    Con manifesto: tax cuts for the wealthy.

    I might vote LD
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 8,533
    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?
  • "We very much regret leaving, but we have to make the best of it"

    Why do you have to? Why not say that this is a fresh election, and if you choose Labour, you are choosing not to inflict harm on Britain by leaving (or staying out)?

    "we won’t do a trade deal with the USA"

    Is that at all realistic? They are a major trading partner so WTO terms effectively mean Trump can screw us as hard as he likes on tariffs and all we can do is reciprocate against a far more economically powerful trading bloc.

    Labour's position on this is nuts, frankly. An acceptance that Brexit is a nightmare (which infuriates Leavers), plus an unwillingness to do anything about it (which infuriates Remainers).
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,883

    On the economy
    Labour tax rises and spend.
    Tories tax cuts and spend.
    LD tax the same and spend. At a guess.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,274
    The most important leader rating in Ashcroft’s Scottish poll wasn’t Swinson’s. It was Corbyn’s.
  • TomsToms Posts: 1,759
    "with no real prospect that the EU will entertain a fresh application for a moment – after the experience of the last 3 years, they would be mad to do so."

    Well, Nick, I'd like to believe that the UK may not have a total monopoly on lunacy.
  • JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,131

    The most important leader rating in Ashcroft’s Scottish poll wasn’t Swinson’s. It was Corbyn’s.

    The Kraken awakes - you know that cybernats are allowed to post on the PB Scotland threads right??
  • The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    Nonsense. The Lib Dems would pursue "rejoin" and nationalist parties (notably the SNP) have never shared the English fantasy that they are sufficiently important in global terms that they can dictate terms to the rest of the world.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514
    Toms said:

    "with no real prospect that the EU will entertain a fresh application for a moment – after the experience of the last 3 years, they would be mad to do so."

    Well, Nick, I'd like to believe that the UK may not have a total monopoly on lunacy.

    But Juncker has retired.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 14,818

    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    How can a party that seeks sovereignty and control contemplate entering into an FTA with a country which will insist on secret trade tribunals with the power to override what Parliament wants?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 26,338
    As an aside, there will probably never be a better time to get a UK-China FTA. Now, it would piss President Trump off royally, but China would probably agree to all sorts of things they would never normally do to demonstrate that the world had changed.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 1,532

    The most important leader rating in Ashcroft’s Scottish poll wasn’t Swinson’s. It was Corbyn’s.

    It was clear last week Boris is very unpopular. Corbyn is lower.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,883
    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, there will probably never be a better time to get a UK-China FTA. Now, it would piss President Trump off royally, but China would probably agree to all sorts of things they would never normally do to demonstrate that the world had changed.

    And, rather more importantly, to piss Trump off royally.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,514

    The most important leader rating in Ashcroft’s Scottish poll wasn’t Swinson’s. It was Corbyn’s.

    It was clear last week Boris is very unpopular. Corbyn is lower.
    In an Ashcroft poll.

    Has there ever been an Ashcroft poll that bore any resemblance to reality? Serious question,
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 1,274
    edited August 5

    The most important leader rating in Ashcroft’s Scottish poll wasn’t Swinson’s. It was Corbyn’s.

    It was clear last week Boris is very unpopular. Corbyn is lower.
    Yes. This was also evident in last week’s Opinium: Johnson was predictably low in Scotland, but Corbyn was even worse. In fact, much worse. He was -72 (from memory). Totally unprecedented for a Labour leader.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 2,352
    If there is an election immediately after taking us out of the the EU with No Deal it is absolutely essential that the Tories win it. They have to remain in place to take responsibility for what they have done.

    I would imagine all the other parties will silently breathe a huge sigh of relief not to win in those circumstances. If ever thee was the right election for them to lose this would be it.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 20,945
    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,967
    "Nick Palmer was Labour MP for Broxtoer, 1997-2010"

    Hmm - Broxtowe meets Brexit?
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,967
    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    "None will be necessary as the massive economic damage we've caused ourselves will end"
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 20,945

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    "None will be necessary as the massive economic damage we've caused ourselves will end"
    LDs praying for “massive economic damage” or their party is toast.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 320
    Cyclefree said:

    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    How can a party that seeks sovereignty and control contemplate entering into an FTA with a country which will insist on secret trade tribunals with the power to override what Parliament wants?
    As long as it is not the EU!!!!! Not the EU!! Never! Not them. Bl**dy forriners!!!

    The Americans will give the right people nice deals and the rest do not matter.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 9,111
    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 20,945
    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 53,576
    OllyT said:

    If there is an election immediately after taking us out of the the EU with No Deal it is absolutely essential that the Tories win it. They have to remain in place to take responsibility for what they have done.

    I would imagine all the other parties will silently breathe a huge sigh of relief not to win in those circumstances. If ever thee was the right election for them to lose this would be it.

    Nah Corbyn would love it. Anything that goes wrong he'll blame on the Tories.
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 487
    Cyclefree said:

    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    How can a party that seeks sovereignty and control contemplate entering into an FTA with a country which will insist on secret trade tribunals with the power to override what Parliament wants?
    Parliament is quite able to limit, should it so choose, the executive's general trade deal making powers, the extent to which ISDS is used in those deals, any policy carve-out from ISDS jurisdiction, and even an individual deal itself. (I hasten to add that it shouldn't, as these are rightly exec powers).

    If the breadth of the ISDS jurisdiction the counterparty seeks is unacceptable to HMG then it won't sign the deal. It can, after all, be quietly confident that the ISDS court will not grant itself a series of further competencies.

    On topic, here are some manifesto stocking filler policies for life outside the EU. Take your pick, PBers;

    1. Zero-rating or exemption for VAT on sanitary goods
    2. No tariffs on Chinese solar panels
    3. No tariffs on Chinese electric bikes
    4. No tariffs on bananas.
    4a. Massive tariffs on bananas. F*ck bananas.
    5. Points based immigration
    6. Open-door immigration
    7. No immigration.
    8. Proportionality requirement for calling strikes
    9. A toughened proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    10. No proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    11. Replicate EU state aid rules
    12. More prohibitive state aid rules.
    13. Looser state aid rules.
    14. Everyone has to carry a plastic bag.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,025
    I will vote LD if an election is held in November, even if the UK has left the EU.

    I could not vote for Johnson and know other former Tories who will do likewise. I cannot see Labour voters supporting Johnson even if they voted Leave. I dont think Brexit will improve the economy rather it will deteriorate. Creating barriers and buruacratic millstones for business with the EU is an impediment to trade and hence growth. Trade deals with non EU countries are pipe dreams that will take years to achieve if they are obtainable...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 9,111
    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,690
    Mr Palmer, what I do not understand is the Labour argument that the EU will protect workers rights. For example in the Brexit ref Corbyn hismelf said he did not support the posted workers directive and wanted it cancelled or changed.

    So if we have brexited and Labour won a majority they could enact any workers rights they wanted, whereas if there was a deal with the EU that said workers rights were the sole responsiblity of the EU the Labour Govt could not.

    I am sure Corbyn likes the former.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,690
    Drutt said:

    Cyclefree said:

    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    How can a party that seeks sovereignty and control contemplate entering into an FTA with a country which will insist on secret trade tribunals with the power to override what Parliament wants?
    Parliament is quite able to limit, should it so choose, the executive's general trade deal making powers, the extent to which ISDS is used in those deals, any policy carve-out from ISDS jurisdiction, and even an individual deal itself. (I hasten to add that it shouldn't, as these are rightly exec powers).

    If the breadth of the ISDS jurisdiction the counterparty seeks is unacceptable to HMG then it won't sign the deal. It can, after all, be quietly confident that the ISDS court will not grant itself a series of further competencies.

    On topic, here are some manifesto stocking filler policies for life outside the EU. Take your pick, PBers;

    1. Zero-rating or exemption for VAT on sanitary goods
    2. No tariffs on Chinese solar panels
    3. No tariffs on Chinese electric bikes
    4. No tariffs on bananas.
    4a. Massive tariffs on bananas. F*ck bananas.
    5. Points based immigration
    6. Open-door immigration
    7. No immigration.
    8. Proportionality requirement for calling strikes
    9. A toughened proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    10. No proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    11. Replicate EU state aid rules
    12. More prohibitive state aid rules.
    13. Looser state aid rules.
    14. Everyone has to carry a plastic bag.
    Also there is a view in the Trump administration that having a pro America ISDS is bad for FDI, so they are thinking of being more neutral.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826
    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 31,034

    Cyclefree said:

    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    How can a party that seeks sovereignty and control contemplate entering into an FTA with a country which will insist on secret trade tribunals with the power to override what Parliament wants?
    As long as it is not the EU!!!!! Not the EU!! Never! Not them. Bl**dy forriners!!!

    The Americans will give the right people nice deals and the rest do not matter.
    USA 5.3 homicides per 100,000 people
    UK 1.2 homicides per 100,000 people
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,025
    edited August 5
    I would have trouble trusting any type of electronic voting due to potential hacks or rigging of results. My local authority had a questionnaire, when, i registered to vote recently asking about electronic voting and I was very much against it.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 8,533
    edited August 5

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    "None will be necessary as the massive economic damage we've caused ourselves will end"
    It wouldn't be any truer then than it was when we joined.
  • I hope the Conservatives too are giving thought to an election after a no Deal exit.

    Our politicians would have a lot more scope for policy proposals and while I wouldn't expect a bonfire of regulations at that early juncture, a policy to scrap VAT on domestic fuel might go down well as well as on feminine hygiene products so that the silly compensatory measures on the "tampon tax" can also be shelved.


    Time to use our new found freedom on VAT.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,646
    I truly have no idea about either party, but I’m alarmed by the apparent fact that nobody appears to be giving it any thought. Quite possibly, we are going to have to write those manifestos 3 months from now. Isn’t it time we did a bit of contingency planning?

    Do our politicians do thinking and planning ?

    Wouldn't it be a distraction from their plotting and posturing ?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 9,111

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    It's an approximate figure empirically derived from historical data.

    Actually the £9 billion savings is a more unprovable figure because it's hypothetical. You assume the UK won't be making payments to the EU and member states. It's likely that at some point the UK will want to do deals with the EU and member states which involve payments. Money is one the few compelling cards in an otherwise weak hand. It's likely the UK will want to play it. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK pays just as much in net cash outside the EU as in it - notwithstanding the loss of revenue already referred to.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,522

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    By “unproven” it just means you it causes you cognitive dissonance.

    You’ve agreed that Brexit weakens the Union.
    You should agree it creates an economic hit as well, at least in the short term.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 9,584
    Drutt said:

    Cyclefree said:

    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    How can a party that seeks sovereignty and control contemplate entering into an FTA with a country which will insist on secret trade tribunals with the power to override what Parliament wants?
    Parliament is quite able to limit, should it so choose, the executive's general trade deal making powers, the extent to which ISDS is used in those deals, any policy carve-out from ISDS jurisdiction, and even an individual deal itself. (I hasten to add that it shouldn't, as these are rightly exec powers).

    If the breadth of the ISDS jurisdiction the counterparty seeks is unacceptable to HMG then it won't sign the deal. It can, after all, be quietly confident that the ISDS court will not grant itself a series of further competencies.

    On topic, here are some manifesto stocking filler policies for life outside the EU. Take your pick, PBers;

    1. Zero-rating or exemption for VAT on sanitary goods
    2. No tariffs on Chinese solar panels
    3. No tariffs on Chinese electric bikes
    4. No tariffs on bananas.
    4a. Massive tariffs on bananas. F*ck bananas.
    5. Points based immigration
    6. Open-door immigration
    7. No immigration.
    8. Proportionality requirement for calling strikes
    9. A toughened proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    10. No proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    11. Replicate EU state aid rules
    12. More prohibitive state aid rules.
    13. Looser state aid rules.
    14. Everyone has to carry a plastic bag.
    Does 14 have to be plastic? I have a go-bag made of neoprene lined woven polyester with a padded air-mesh back with vents to let moisture escape but prevent water from entering. I'd hate to have to swap it for a plaggy bag from Tesco... :)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,630

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    An equally unproven opinion.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 25,227
    How Trump may lose...

    "Wisconsin Depends on World Markets"

    https://ustr.gov/map/state-benefits/wi
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 2,352
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    "None will be necessary as the massive economic damage we've caused ourselves will end"
    LDs praying for “massive economic damage” or their party is toast.
    Johnson and Farage praying there isn't or they are toast.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,630
    An interesting article, Nick.
    But it rather suggests that Labour has given up already. Or is it that they just don’t mind No Deal all that much ?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,883

    I would have trouble trusting any type of electronic voting due to potential hacks or rigging of results. My local authority had a questionnaire, when, i registered to vote recently asking about electronic voting and I was very much against it.
    Ah. But was it a paper or electronic questionnaire?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 9,584
    Apropos of nothing, North Face bags have strap connectors that have a whistle concealed in them for emergencies. This is a true fact. I had one for years and simply never noticed.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 25,227
    Scott_P said:
    Has Scotland got enough room for all the Remainers and EU lovers? :lol:
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536

    How Trump may lose...

    "Wisconsin Depends on World Markets"

    https://ustr.gov/map/state-benefits/wi

    And it doesn’t say that half of the world’s entire cranberry production comes from Wisconsin.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    It's an approximate figure empirically derived from historical data.

    Actually the £9 billion savings is a more unprovable figure because it's hypothetical. You assume the UK won't be making payments to the EU and member states. It's likely that at some point the UK will want to do deals with the EU and member states which involve payments. Money is one the few compelling cards in an otherwise weak hand. It's likely the UK will want to play it. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK pays just as much in net cash outside the EU as in it - notwithstanding the loss of revenue already referred to.
    Nope. You are just pulling figures out of the air at random to try and justify your position. The ending of contributions is a fact and we can then choose (I like that word you see) where we spend that money. Of course there will be some programmes we might want to be involved in but that will be a choice along with everything else rather than a forced necessity due to our membership of the EU racket.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,630
    O’Rourke really ought to run for the Senate again...

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/el-paso-shooting-gun-control-nra-patrick-crusius-solution-john-cornyn-walmart-latest-a9039191.html
    ...Cornyn, whose website boasts of his “perfect A+ rating” from the National Rifle Association because of his defence of the right to bear arms, last year opposed moves to restrict access to the sort of semi-automatic weapons used in the weekend’s shootings, although he did support a move to improve background checks after a mass shooting at a church at Sutherland Springs in 2017 killed 26 people.

    Asked why there was no ban on semi-automatic weapons, he said: ‘In congress we been trying to find the answer. Each one of these incidents has their own unique characteristics. I don’t think it’s fair to say there is one cause or one solution.”...
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 2,060
    viewcode said:

    Drutt said:

    Cyclefree said:

    The Lib Dems will be left with nothing. Their only policy is 'don't pass us the ball'. The nationalist parties won't fare much better. How can a party that seeks 'independence' have a policy of giving up control over fisheries?

    How can a party that seeks sovereignty and control contemplate entering into an FTA with a country which will insist on secret trade tribunals with the power to override what Parliament wants?
    Parliament is quite able to limit, should it so choose, the executive's general trade deal making powers, the extent to which ISDS is used in those deals, any policy carve-out from ISDS jurisdiction, and even an individual deal itself. (I hasten to add that it shouldn't, as these are rightly exec powers).

    If the breadth of the ISDS jurisdiction the counterparty seeks is unacceptable to HMG then it won't sign the deal. It can, after all, be quietly confident that the ISDS court will not grant itself a series of further competencies.

    On topic, here are some manifesto stocking filler policies for life outside the EU. Take your pick, PBers;

    1. Zero-rating or exemption for VAT on sanitary goods
    2. No tariffs on Chinese solar panels
    3. No tariffs on Chinese electric bikes
    4. No tariffs on bananas.
    4a. Massive tariffs on bananas. F*ck bananas.
    5. Points based immigration
    6. Open-door immigration
    7. No immigration.
    8. Proportionality requirement for calling strikes
    9. A toughened proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    10. No proportionality requirement for calling strikes.
    11. Replicate EU state aid rules
    12. More prohibitive state aid rules.
    13. Looser state aid rules.
    14. Everyone has to carry a plastic bag.
    Does 14 have to be plastic? I have a go-bag made of neoprene lined woven polyester with a padded air-mesh back with vents to let moisture escape but prevent water from entering. I'd hate to have to swap it for a plaggy bag from Tesco... :)
    Polyester is plastic.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,816
    Nigelb said:

    An interesting article, Nick.
    But it rather suggests that Labour has given up already. Or is it that they just don’t mind No Deal all that much ?

    No, as my Labour List article will show when it appears. But we should recognise that success is not guaranteed and have a fall-back position.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 25,227
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    By “unproven” it just means you it causes you cognitive dissonance.

    You’ve agreed that Brexit weakens the Union.
    You should agree it creates an economic hit as well, at least in the short term.
    I have not agreed that it weakens the Union. I have said my hope is that it ends the Union. There is a huge difference there.

    There may be an economic hit from leaving but it will be no where near as bad as claimed and in the long run I believe there will be an economic benefit.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,630
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    "None will be necessary as the massive economic damage we've caused ourselves will end"
    LDs praying for “massive economic damage” or their party is toast.
    On the contrary - they wish to prevent No Deal.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826
    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,816

    Mr Palmer, what I do not understand is the Labour argument that the EU will protect workers rights. For example in the Brexit ref Corbyn hismelf said he did not support the posted workers directive and wanted it cancelled or changed.

    So if we have brexited and Labour won a majority they could enact any workers rights they wanted, whereas if there was a deal with the EU that said workers rights were the sole responsiblity of the EU the Labour Govt could not.

    I am sure Corbyn likes the former.

    Labour's view is that the EU offers a good floor for workers' rights in good times and bad. During periods of Labour government, we can offer greater rights - there's nothing in the Directive that prevents that. During Tory governments no doubt they'd be cut back again - but they can't be cut very far.

    Outside the EU, the Government can cut them as much they like. It's a freedom, but a freedom to destroy basic security.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 9,111

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    It's an approximate figure empirically derived from historical data.

    Actually the £9 billion savings is a more unprovable figure because it's hypothetical. You assume the UK won't be making payments to the EU and member states. It's likely that at some point the UK will want to do deals with the EU and member states which involve payments. Money is one the few compelling cards in an otherwise weak hand. It's likely the UK will want to play it. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK pays just as much in net cash outside the EU as in it - notwithstanding the loss of revenue already referred to.
    Nope. You are just pulling figures out of the air at random to try and justify your position. The ending of contributions is a fact and we can then choose (I like that word you see) where we spend that money. Of course there will be some programmes we might want to be involved in but that will be a choice along with everything else rather than a forced necessity due to our membership of the EU racket.
    No I didn't pull figures out of thin air. This is tedious. Yes we have choices. None of them mean we're materially better off. Which is interesting because normally things are nuanced. Brexit is essentially all downside in practical terms. The downside can be mitigated but the Brexiteers are making no attempt to do so.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,025

    Scott_P said:
    Has Scotland got enough room for all the Remainers and EU lovers? :lol:
    I don't think talk of No Deal is anything but a crude attempt by the new Government to try and get a deal without the backstop. If it is so obvious to me, then it will occur to the EU negotiators. No Deal means a massive shock to the economy. I doubt Johnson has the resolve for No Deal. Too much damage...
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 702
    You can bet that all the Leaver propagandists now saying "if you respect democracy then we must leave and then you can campaign to rejoin" will the minute we leave switch to saying "you mustn't campaign to rejoin because we've only just left and the decision was made for a generation and you are not respecting the will of the people you metropolitan elitist."
    Because the only thing more predictable than being called a metropolitan elitist by an Old Etonian funded by Mayfair-based disaster capitalists is Leavers telling you to respect democracy by not voting. Fuck em.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    It's an approximate figure empirically derived from historical data.

    Actually the £9 billion savings is a more unprovable figure because it's hypothetical. You assume the UK won't be making payments to the EU and member states. It's likely that at some point the UK will want to do deals with the EU and member states which involve payments. Money is one the few compelling cards in an otherwise weak hand. It's likely the UK will want to play it. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK pays just as much in net cash outside the EU as in it - notwithstanding the loss of revenue already referred to.
    Nope. You are just pulling figures out of the air at random to try and justify your position. The ending of contributions is a fact and we can then choose (I like that word you see) where we spend that money. Of course there will be some programmes we might want to be involved in but that will be a choice along with everything else rather than a forced necessity due to our membership of the EU racket.
    No I didn't pull figures out of thin air. This is tedious. Yes we have choices. None of them mean we're materially better off. Which is interesting because normally things are nuanced. Brexit is essentially all downside in practical terms. The downside can be mitigated but the Brexiteers are making no attempt to do so.
    It is certainly tedious that you keep repeating this rubbish.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,536

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    By “unproven” it just means you it causes you cognitive dissonance.

    You’ve agreed that Brexit weakens the Union.
    You should agree it creates an economic hit as well, at least in the short term.
    I have not agreed that it weakens the Union. I have said my hope is that it ends the Union. There is a huge difference there.

    There may be an economic hit from leaving but it will be no where near as bad as claimed and in the long run I believe there will be an economic benefit.
    Is this JRM’s thirty five year long run?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,883

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    Does the article outline HOW he would do this? Am on my iPad so can't enlarge enough. Surely this would be a constitutional outrage?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 25,227
    edited August 5

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    The papers are losing the plot. Maybe their main pol staff are on the beach?

    If Johnson loses a VoNC he can stay as PM for up to 14 days. But only if no one else can command majority. If no other individual has persuaded the Queen through the usual channels, or has won a formal confidence vote, then Johnson does get to decide the date of GE.

    The way the papers are writing this is that he will be No Confidenced and then still stay in Downing Street for ever and a day, ignoring parliament and trashing the constitution.

    Ridiculous spin. No doubt guided by Steve Hilton Mini Me.

    The answer is obvious. The sane MPs bring down Johnson and then make sure they have someone within the 14 days who commands the majority.

    In that case, Cummings and Johnson would be on their way to the Tower if they refused to hand over the Seals of Office.

  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,025
    Outrageous if true! PM without mandate stays in office even when he cannot command a majority. The UK is in real trouble...
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 7,217

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    Like saying 'Never mind the loss of your high-paying job, because we have no evidence as to the pay rise you might have expected next year, whereas it is clearly proven that you will no longer be paying for a season ticket or dry cleaning all those suits.'
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 3,509
    Of all the accusations that are levelled at Jeremy Corbyn, a suspicion that he will suck up to Donald Trump is not among them.

    Sorry Nick this damns with faint praise and is pretty selective, calling into question your objectivity. Why not list those many undesirables whom he has sucked up to, and in many cases still does. Most if not all of these constitute a far greater risk to our nation than Trump ever would.

    I can quite see how your constituents preferred Soubry to you, which speaks volumes.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826

    You can bet that all the Leaver propagandists now saying "if you respect democracy then we must leave and then you can campaign to rejoin" will the minute we leave switch to saying "you mustn't campaign to rejoin because we've only just left and the decision was made for a generation and you are not respecting the will of the people you metropolitan elitist."
    Because the only thing more predictable than being called a metropolitan elitist by an Old Etonian funded by Mayfair-based disaster capitalists is Leavers telling you to respect democracy by not voting. Fuck em.

    Nope I can honestly say - as I have said all along - that when we leave we will have fulfilled the mandate and I would not say a word against people campaigning to rejoin. Okay I would disagree with them and argue against them but I would argue against the act of rejoining, not against their right or even responsibility to campaign for us to rejoin if those were their beliefs.

    Once we have left there is absolutely no democratic argument I can see against a campaign to rejoin.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 48,427
    Up to 30 Labour MPs are prepared to vote for a Brexit deal if Boris Johnson secures fresh concessions from Brussels as the Prime Minister insisted: “The last thing I want to do is call another election."

    Although the EU is now working on the hypothesis that Britain plans to leave without a deal, Downing Street appeared to open the door to bringing the Withdrawal Agreement back to parliament by insisting that removing the Irish backstop would represent “significant progress”.

    The move is likely to anger the so-called ‘Spartans’ in the European Research Group of Eurosceptic Tories who want the Brexit deal to be torn up in favour of an interim free trade agreement (FTA) with the EU.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/05/30-labour-mps-prepared-vote-brexit-deal-boris-johnson-secures/
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826
    Ishmael_Z said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    Like saying 'Never mind the loss of your high-paying job, because we have no evidence as to the pay rise you might have expected next year, whereas it is clearly proven that you will no longer be paying for a season ticket or dry cleaning all those suits.'
    That is literally unintelligible.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 3,509
    Doesn't pot and kettle come to mind?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 14,646
    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    By “unproven” it just means you it causes you cognitive dissonance.

    You’ve agreed that Brexit weakens the Union.
    You should agree it creates an economic hit as well, at least in the short term.
    I have not agreed that it weakens the Union. I have said my hope is that it ends the Union. There is a huge difference there.

    There may be an economic hit from leaving but it will be no where near as bad as claimed and in the long run I believe there will be an economic benefit.
    Is this JRM’s thirty five year long run?
    There's already an economic benefit for those who work in wealth creating sectors.

    Wealth consuming oldies who have lots of foreign holidays might not be doing so well though.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 25,227
    edited August 5
    The only way now to stop No Deal has been spelt out by Cummings in massive six foot letters:

    1) Do not press the trigger unless you have the votes for an alternative PM e.g. Clarke ( who can be in place within the 14 days).

    2) Do it on 3 or 4 the September - any later means probable that Johnson can No Deal during a GE (even those days are tight).

    The Sane MPs must press the trigger the day they walk back in September.

    They must ignore Jezza's weaselly vacillating dither and get the job done.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 12,432

    Of all the accusations that are levelled at Jeremy Corbyn, a suspicion that he will suck up to Donald Trump is not among them.

    Sorry Nick this damns with faint praise and is pretty selective, calling into question your objectivity. Why not list those many undesirables whom he has sucked up to, and in many cases still does. Most if not all of these constitute a far greater risk to our nation than Trump ever would.

    I can quite see how your constituents preferred Soubry to you, which speaks volumes.

    You have rather yanked it out of context: showing why voters will believe the immediately preceding sentence.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 702

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    The papers are losing the plot. Maybe their main pol staff are on the beach?

    If Johnson loses a VoNC he can stay as PM for up to 14 days. But only if no one else can command majority. If no other individual has persuaded the Queen through the usual channels, or has won a formal confidence vote, then Johnson does get to decide the date of GE.

    The way the papers are writing this is that he will be No Confidenced and then still stay in Downing Street for ever and a day, ignoring parliament and trashing the constitution.

    Ridiculous spin. No doubt guided by Steve Hilton Mini Me.

    The answer is obvious. The sane MPs bring down Johnson and then make sure they have someone within the 14 days who commands the majority.

    In that case, Cummings and Johnson would be on their way to the Tower if they refused to hand over the Seals of Office.

    I think they are betting that parliament won't be able to agree an alternative PM to take over before an election. I don't know whether that will be the case or not, but it is easy to imagine it happening (eg Labour won't accept a GONU not headed by Corbyn, the Lib Dems refuse to support one with Corbyn as PM, not enough Tories are willing to commit political suicide and defect). To crash out of the EU during an election campaign with Johnson as caretaker PM would be a constitutional abomination though, and I am not sure our democracy and union could survive it. There would I am sure be violence.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826
    dixiedean said:

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    Does the article outline HOW he would do this? Am on my iPad so can't enlarge enough. Surely this would be a constitutional outrage?
    Yes it says how it thinks he would do it but it is utter rubbish. It is not, as I first suspected, a spin on the 'stay in power for 14 days or until an alternative has the confidence of the House'. That would be spin on what is the basic constitutional position.

    But this clearly stated as staying in power even if there was a viable alternative government put forward. It is utter lunacy either by a copy writer who does not understand the law or, more worryingly, by someone in Government who is equally ignorant.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 5,883
    Scott_P said:

    Up to 30 Labour MPs are prepared to vote for a Brexit deal if Boris Johnson secures fresh concessions from Brussels as the Prime Minister insisted: “The last thing I want to do is call another election."

    Although the EU is now working on the hypothesis that Britain plans to leave without a deal, Downing Street appeared to open the door to bringing the Withdrawal Agreement back to parliament by insisting that removing the Irish backstop would represent “significant progress”.

    The move is likely to anger the so-called ‘Spartans’ in the European Research Group of Eurosceptic Tories who want the Brexit deal to be torn up in favour of an interim free trade agreement (FTA) with the EU.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/05/30-labour-mps-prepared-vote-brexit-deal-boris-johnson-secures/

    Telegraph believes "Boris will sort everything out" shock.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,690

    IanB2 said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    FF43 said:

    TGOHF said:

    HYUFD said:

    LD policy before Brexit will remain stay in the EU.

    If we Leave, especially with No Deal, it would likely switch to rejoin the single market first as a platform to rejoin the full EU if public opinion shifts in that direction. Labour would be similar but focused on rejoining the Customs Union first.

    The Tories will still aim for a Canada style FTA and technical solution for the Irish border

    “So which taxes will rise or cuts will be made to pay the £15Bn annual membership of the EU when you rejoin Ms Swinson?”
    Which tax rises or cuts made will pay for the vastly bigger costs of Brexit?
    We will have £39Bn to put in the kitty..
    £39 billion one off savings over more than a decade versus £20 billion (and rising) of revenue foregone each and every year thanks to Brexit - and that's before we even leave.

    Very bad deal.
    Your £20 billion of revenue is utterly unproven. What is proven is that we will no longer be paying in excess of £9 billion a year net to the EU in contributions. Membership of the EU is indeed a very bad deal.
    By “unproven” it just means you it causes you cognitive dissonance.

    You’ve agreed that Brexit weakens the Union.
    You should agree it creates an economic hit as well, at least in the short term.
    I have not agreed that it weakens the Union. I have said my hope is that it ends the Union. There is a huge difference there.

    There may be an economic hit from leaving but it will be no where near as bad as claimed and in the long run I believe there will be an economic benefit.
    Is this JRM’s thirty five year long run?
    There's already an economic benefit for those who work in wealth creating sectors.

    Wealth consuming oldies who have lots of foreign holidays might not be doing so well though.
    There is already an economic benefit for the low paid. There wages are going up after being told that large scale immigration searching for low paid jobs had no affect on wages.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 152
    If parliament is ethical and refuses to put a Jew-killer commemorating Marxist in No 10, and they can't agree on anyone else, why can't they just pass the withdrawal agreement over Boris' head?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 702

    You can bet that all the Leaver propagandists now saying "if you respect democracy then we must leave and then you can campaign to rejoin" will the minute we leave switch to saying "you mustn't campaign to rejoin because we've only just left and the decision was made for a generation and you are not respecting the will of the people you metropolitan elitist."
    Because the only thing more predictable than being called a metropolitan elitist by an Old Etonian funded by Mayfair-based disaster capitalists is Leavers telling you to respect democracy by not voting. Fuck em.

    Nope I can honestly say - as I have said all along - that when we leave we will have fulfilled the mandate and I would not say a word against people campaigning to rejoin. Okay I would disagree with them and argue against them but I would argue against the act of rejoining, not against their right or even responsibility to campaign for us to rejoin if those were their beliefs.

    Once we have left there is absolutely no democratic argument I can see against a campaign to rejoin.
    That is very nice of you but you will be the only one I am sure.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    The papers are losing the plot. Maybe their main pol staff are on the beach?

    If Johnson loses a VoNC he can stay as PM for up to 14 days. But only if no one else can command majority. If no other individual has persuaded the Queen through the usual channels, or has won a formal confidence vote, then Johnson does get to decide the date of GE.

    The way the papers are writing this is that he will be No Confidenced and then still stay in Downing Street for ever and a day, ignoring parliament and trashing the constitution.

    Ridiculous spin. No doubt guided by Steve Hilton Mini Me.

    The answer is obvious. The sane MPs bring down Johnson and then make sure they have someone within the 14 days who commands the majority.

    In that case, Cummings and Johnson would be on their way to the Tower if they refused to hand over the Seals of Office.

    I think they are betting that parliament won't be able to agree an alternative PM to take over before an election. I don't know whether that will be the case or not, but it is easy to imagine it happening (eg Labour won't accept a GONU not headed by Corbyn, the Lib Dems refuse to support one with Corbyn as PM, not enough Tories are willing to commit political suicide and defect). To crash out of the EU during an election campaign with Johnson as caretaker PM would be a constitutional abomination though, and I am not sure our democracy and union could survive it. There would I am sure be violence.
    That's what I thought as well but the article clearly says he would intend to stay on even if a viable alternative Government with the support of the House had been put forward.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826

    The only way now to stop No Deal has been spelt out by Cummings in massive six foot letters:

    1) Do not press the trigger unless you have the votes for an alternative PM e.g. Clarke ( who can be in place within the 14 days).

    2) Do it on 3 or 4 the September - any later means probable that Johnson can No Deal during a GE (even those days are tight).

    The Sane MPs must press the trigger the day they walk back in September.

    They must ignore Jezza's weaselly vacillating dither and get the job done.

    I know there is a minimum time before an election is called (25 working days so around 33-35 days in total depending on when weekends fall) but is there a maximum defined in the FTPA?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 702
    Gabs2 said:

    If parliament is ethical and refuses to put a Jew-killer commemorating Marxist in No 10, and they can't agree on anyone else, why can't they just pass the withdrawal agreement over Boris' head?

    There is no majority for the WA in Parliament and won't be one just because the openly racist and homophobic and Islamophobic PM puts a gun to its head.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 152

    You can bet that all the Leaver propagandists now saying "if you respect democracy then we must leave and then you can campaign to rejoin" will the minute we leave switch to saying "you mustn't campaign to rejoin because we've only just left and the decision was made for a generation and you are not respecting the will of the people you metropolitan elitist."
    Because the only thing more predictable than being called a metropolitan elitist by an Old Etonian funded by Mayfair-based disaster capitalists is Leavers telling you to respect democracy by not voting. Fuck em.

    Nope I can honestly say - as I have said all along - that when we leave we will have fulfilled the mandate and I would not say a word against people campaigning to rejoin. Okay I would disagree with them and argue against them but I would argue against the act of rejoining, not against their right or even responsibility to campaign for us to rejoin if those were their beliefs.

    Once we have left there is absolutely no democratic argument I can see against a campaign to rejoin.
    As a Remainer I think this is the only fair position. It is wrong to refuse to implement an expressly asked vote and also wrong to say we can't change our minds after the vote has been implemented.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 3,509

    You can bet that all the Leaver propagandists now saying "if you respect democracy then we must leave and then you can campaign to rejoin" will the minute we leave switch to saying "you mustn't campaign to rejoin because we've only just left and the decision was made for a generation and you are not respecting the will of the people you metropolitan elitist."
    Because the only thing more predictable than being called a metropolitan elitist by an Old Etonian funded by Mayfair-based disaster capitalists is Leavers telling you to respect democracy by not voting. Fuck em.

    Nope I can honestly say - as I have said all along - that when we leave we will have fulfilled the mandate and I would not say a word against people campaigning to rejoin. Okay I would disagree with them and argue against them but I would argue against the act of rejoining, not against their right or even responsibility to campaign for us to rejoin if those were their beliefs.

    Once we have left there is absolutely no democratic argument I can see against a campaign to rejoin.
    That is very nice of you but you will be the only one I am sure.
    Your faith is misplaced, which I find unsurprising.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 1,790
    Scott_P said:
    Having offered the UK nothing, the EU has for months been explicit that it has no desire or intent to renegotiate.

    Now they find that that hardline stance is reciprocated by a government that is clearly preparing to leave come what may and may possibly be able to take the UK out on 31st October despite the opposition of MPs.

    For the first time since the 2016 vote, the EU is under some real pressure after seeing an unravelling of the assumptions upon which it based its negotiating strategy.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 25,227

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    The papers are losing the plot. Maybe their main pol staff are on the beach?

    If Johnson loses a VoNC he can stay as PM for up to 14 days. But only if no one else can command majority. If no other individual has persuaded the Queen through the usual channels, or has won a formal confidence vote, then Johnson does get to decide the date of GE.

    The way the papers are writing this is that he will be No Confidenced and then still stay in Downing Street for ever and a day, ignoring parliament and trashing the constitution.

    Ridiculous spin. No doubt guided by Steve Hilton Mini Me.

    The answer is obvious. The sane MPs bring down Johnson and then make sure they have someone within the 14 days who commands the majority.

    In that case, Cummings and Johnson would be on their way to the Tower if they refused to hand over the Seals of Office.

    I think they are betting that parliament won't be able to agree an alternative PM to take over before an election. I don't know whether that will be the case or not, but it is easy to imagine it happening (eg Labour won't accept a GONU not headed by Corbyn, the Lib Dems refuse to support one with Corbyn as PM, not enough Tories are willing to commit political suicide and defect). To crash out of the EU during an election campaign with Johnson as caretaker PM would be a constitutional abomination though, and I am not sure our democracy and union could survive it. There would I am sure be violence.
    That's what I thought as well but the article clearly says he would intend to stay on even if a viable alternative Government with the support of the House had been put forward.
    That's what I mean. It is utter bollx, crapply written journalism.

    Or, a coup d'etat is being proposed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 13,630

    Outrageous if true! PM without mandate stays in office even when he cannot command a majority. The UK is in real trouble...
    The article claims more than that - it says that Johnson could ignore a majority backing a government of national unity after his losing a VONC.
    Like the most of Cummings’ utterances, it is the purest ordure.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 1,120

    The only way now to stop No Deal has been spelt out by Cummings in massive six foot letters:

    1) Do not press the trigger unless you have the votes for an alternative PM e.g. Clarke ( who can be in place within the 14 days).

    2) Do it on 3 or 4 the September - any later means probable that Johnson can No Deal during a GE (even those days are tight).

    The Sane MPs must press the trigger the day they walk back in September.

    They must ignore Jezza's weaselly vacillating dither and get the job done.

    What Cummings has done is make it absolutely clear that they can't No Confidence Johnson without 325 MPs (at least) who have signed pledges in blood stating they are prepared to make Jeremy Corbyn PM in order to stop No Deal. If they push the button and then can't get to the magic number, Johnson wins automatically. Therefore, they're more likely to wait until later in September, when more MPs start panicking. It's going to go right down to the wire, is my guess.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 702

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    The papers are losing the plot. Maybe their main pol staff are on the beach?

    If Johnson loses a VoNC he can stay as PM for up to 14 days. But only if no one else can command majority. If no other individual has persuaded the Queen through the usual channels, or has won a formal confidence vote, then Johnson does get to decide the date of GE.

    The way the papers are writing this is that he will be No Confidenced and then still stay in Downing Street for ever and a day, ignoring parliament and trashing the constitution.

    Ridiculous spin. No doubt guided by Steve Hilton Mini Me.

    The answer is obvious. The sane MPs bring down Johnson and then make sure they have someone within the 14 days who commands the majority.

    In that case, Cummings and Johnson would be on their way to the Tower if they refused to hand over the Seals of Office.

    I think they are betting that parliament won't be able to agree an alternative PM to take over before an election. I don't know whether that will be the case or not, but it is easy to imagine it happening (eg Labour won't accept a GONU not headed by Corbyn, the Lib Dems refuse to support one with Corbyn as PM, not enough Tories are willing to commit political suicide and defect). To crash out of the EU during an election campaign with Johnson as caretaker PM would be a constitutional abomination though, and I am not sure our democracy and union could survive it. There would I am sure be violence.
    That's what I thought as well but the article clearly says he would intend to stay on even if a viable alternative Government with the support of the House had been put forward.
    That would be a coup and would invite serious violence as well as putting HMQ in a very difficult position. If that is his plan then he is even more dangerous than I thought he was.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 1,790

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    The papers are losing the plot. Maybe their main pol staff are on the beach?

    If Johnson loses a VoNC he can stay as PM for up to 14 days. But only if no one else can command majority. If no other individual has persuaded the Queen through the usual channels, or has won a formal confidence vote, then Johnson does get to decide the date of GE.

    The way the papers are writing this is that he will be No Confidenced and then still stay in Downing Street for ever and a day, ignoring parliament and trashing the constitution.

    Ridiculous spin. No doubt guided by Steve Hilton Mini Me.

    The answer is obvious. The sane MPs bring down Johnson and then make sure they have someone within the 14 days who commands the majority.

    In that case, Cummings and Johnson would be on their way to the Tower if they refused to hand over the Seals of Office.

    I think they are betting that parliament won't be able to agree an alternative PM to take over before an election. I don't know whether that will be the case or not, but it is easy to imagine it happening (eg Labour won't accept a GONU not headed by Corbyn, the Lib Dems refuse to support one with Corbyn as PM, not enough Tories are willing to commit political suicide and defect). To crash out of the EU during an election campaign with Johnson as caretaker PM would be a constitutional abomination though, and I am not sure our democracy and union could survive it. There would I am sure be violence.
    That's what I thought as well but the article clearly says he would intend to stay on even if a viable alternative Government with the support of the House had been put forward.
    That's what I mean. It is utter bollx, crapply written journalism.

    Or, a coup d'etat is being proposed.
    Crappy journalism surely.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 11,636
    edited August 5
    On topic, No Deal isn't a conclusion, it's the start of years or decades of exhausting negotiations. Rejoining would be quicker and simpler, because you know what it looks like - maybe just need to haggle over the rebate - and promises a huge, immediate boost to the economy and therefore lots of free money to spend.

    So I think the LibDems would obviously run on Brejoin. I imagine Labour would make a succession of confused attempts to triangulate, because that's how they roll.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,826

    I have no idea if it is bollocks or not but if he is considering it then he is even madder than I thought.
    The papers are losing the plot. Maybe their main pol staff are on the beach?

    If Johnson loses a VoNC he can stay as PM for up to 14 days. But only if no one else can command majority. If no other individual has persuaded the Queen through the usual channels, or has won a formal confidence vote, then Johnson does get to decide the date of GE.

    The way the papers are writing this is that he will be No Confidenced and then still stay in Downing Street for ever and a day, ignoring parliament and trashing the constitution.

    Ridiculous spin. No doubt guided by Steve Hilton Mini Me.

    The answer is obvious. The sane MPs bring down Johnson and then make sure they have someone within the 14 days who commands the majority.

    In that case, Cummings and Johnson would be on their way to the Tower if they refused to hand over the Seals of Office.

    I think they are betting that parliament won't be able to agree an alternative PM to take over before an election. I don't know whether that will be the case or not, but it is easy to imagine it happening (eg Labour won't accept a GONU not headed by Corbyn, the Lib Dems refuse to support one with Corbyn as PM, not enough Tories are willing to commit political suicide and defect). To crash out of the EU during an election campaign with Johnson as caretaker PM would be a constitutional abomination though, and I am not sure our democracy and union could survive it. There would I am sure be violence.
    That's what I thought as well but the article clearly says he would intend to stay on even if a viable alternative Government with the support of the House had been put forward.
    That would be a coup and would invite serious violence as well as putting HMQ in a very difficult position. If that is his plan then he is even more dangerous than I thought he was.
    I would have to say that I would find Brexit under those circumstances unacceptable as well. Whatever is done must be legal or it is unsustainable and immoral.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 1,120


    Mr Palmer, what I do not understand is the Labour argument that the EU will protect workers rights. For example in the Brexit ref Corbyn hismelf said he did not support the posted workers directive and wanted it cancelled or changed.

    So if we have brexited and Labour won a majority they could enact any workers rights they wanted, whereas if there was a deal with the EU that said workers rights were the sole responsiblity of the EU the Labour Govt could not.

    I am sure Corbyn likes the former.

    Labour's view is that the EU offers a good floor for workers' rights in good times and bad. During periods of Labour government, we can offer greater rights - there's nothing in the Directive that prevents that. During Tory governments no doubt they'd be cut back again - but they can't be cut very far.

    Outside the EU, the Government can cut them as much they like. It's a freedom, but a freedom to destroy basic security.
    Being able to work longer hours than in the EU Working Hours Directive is also freedom.

    I grant that not having to have access to drinking water and basic sanitation (etc) isn't, but I assume even the Tories wouldn't ever seek to overturn those.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,522
    edited August 5

    Outrageous if true! PM without mandate stays in office even when he cannot command a majority. The UK is in real trouble...
    Nothing to see here...just the PM’s spokesman briefing to the Times that he will essentially lead a coup d’etat to remain in power...

    One of those lovely Brexit dividends Tyndall et al promised us.
This discussion has been closed.