Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Changing the Prime Minister might be the only way

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited September 9 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Changing the Prime Minister might be the only way

One thing the existing House of Commons can agree on (it can’t on anything else) is that it doesn’t want No Deal. It’s now voted several times to this effect and, in fact, it’s as determined to prevent No Deal as the Government is to deliver Brexit by 31st October at all costs. It has been trying to do everything it can to stop it: delaying a General Election, challenging the proroguing of Parliament, and, now, passing the Hillary Benn Bill into law.

Read the full story here


«13456710

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,651
    First.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 26,696
    The man who could only command a third of the Conservative Party membership.

    Hmmmm..... Not seeing it myself.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Second. Like Canning in the shortest serving PM records.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,601
    Hunt didn't even argue against no deal during the leadership contest.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Good thread. Hunt has kept his head down in this imbroglio and so far has only tweeted this:



  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409

    The man who could only command a third of the Conservative Party membership.

    Hmmmm..... Not seeing it myself.

    I don’t think they’re going to be asked......
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409
    Looks like HMQEII is going to break her tie with George III for “most PMs” (currently 14 each).
  • I've considerable sympathy with the broad thrust of this thread header and agree with its specific conclusion. There is considerable value in Jeremy Hunt as next PM on the quoted prices. He's the GNU PM that allows the Conservative Party to retain control. If Boris' premiership implodes I can't see the '22 letting him become LotO and potentially keeping the party there.

    The details I would quibble with are the possibility of EUCO kicking us out - why shut down free entertainment ? - and the positioning of the minor parties. The SNP, LDs, Plaid et al won't abstain on the WA now. They'll stand by revocation for the historical record and narrative purposes. Now that it's confirmed Bercow will be challenged by the Conservatives in the GE he's little to gain by moderation on SO24. As long as the majority for extension exists it will get its way.
  • A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    edited September 9
    It’s an interesting idea, Casino, but it seems exceedingly unlikely, and would represent such a dramatic change of stance from Hunt that it’s hard to see how he might get the backing of naturally suspicious Labour MPs over any of the other alternatives.

    And would they really vote for a WA they have consistently voted against, in preference to trying for some other hail Mary solution ?

    One thing you are almost certainly right about us that a lot of talk will be going on during prorogation about an alternate PM, since, only that might provide the ‘change of circumstances’ required by the French to agree to an extension.
    That would, of course, need to come with a more or less off the shelf plan, too. Norway style solution rather than May’s WA ?

    Norway, of course, would make a great deal more sense from the POV of both the SNP and the Lib Dems.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,074
    edited September 9
    I just cannot accept that any MP would abstain. It's been floated as possible many times, before things escalated to where we are now.

    And what ridiculousness that it might take until late October 2019 before MPs decide its the last chance saloon and no other options remain but to take down the government. Its herculean levels of indecision and over caution.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 375
    It's the answer we've all been waiting for!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,074
    Artist said:

    Hunt didn't even argue against no deal during the leadership contest.

    I thought he didnt, then did, then didnt again.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 47,074

    Good thread. Hunt has kept his head down in this imbroglio and so far has only tweeted this:



    Looks like a milquetoast 'I dont like what's going on but also have no alternatives so will just meaninglessly plead for unity' kind of response.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,193
    It wouldn't be a gov of national unity, it'd be the losers from 2017 with a handful of renegade tories.

    Hunt is young enough to have long term leadership elections, leading an administration largely compromised of Labour mps (Corbyn as Deputy Pm, Abbot as Home Sec, Jo Swainson at Education ?) would end them for ever.

    Sure, he might throw away his career in the interests of the country, but I wouldn't bet on it......
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129
    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.
  • A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 30,182
    Nigelb said:

    It’s an interesting idea, Casino, but it seems exceedingly unlikely, and would represent such a dramatic change of stance from Hunt that it’s hard to see how he might get the backing of naturally suspicious Labour MPs over any of the other alternatives.

    And would they really vote for a WA they have consistently voted against, in preference to trying for some other hail Mary solution ?

    One thing you are almost certainly right about us that a lot of talk will be going on during prorogation about an alternate PM, since, only that might provide the ‘change of circumstances’ required by the French to agree to an extension.
    That would, of course, need to come with a more or less off the shelf plan, too. Norway style solution rather than May’s WA ?

    Norway, of course, would make a great deal more sense from the POV of both the SNP and the Lib Dems.

    In this scenario, failure to agree any extension at the European council meeting on 17-18th October - the only place it can be agreed - the doomsday clock has only 13 days left to tick. There is no time left to try for some other Hail Mary solution. Revoke or the Deal on the table will be the only two solutions left, or it’s a No Deal Brexit by default.

    Is it possible that all the MPs who oppose it won’t be able to see that their only chance to stop it is to pull together as one, and organise themselves to form an administration, yet alone make it work?

    Yes, absolutely. But they do now have several weeks during prorogation where the smarter ones will work this out.

    They aren’t going to spend much time at Conference Party fringe events this year.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,988
    Good morning, everyone.

    Better Hunt than Johnson. MPs were morons to put the buffoon through to the final two.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 35,409

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
    Thank you for demonstrating the author’s point!
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 30,182
    kle4 said:

    Good thread. Hunt has kept his head down in this imbroglio and so far has only tweeted this:



    Looks like a milquetoast 'I dont like what's going on but also have no alternatives so will just meaninglessly plead for unity' kind of response.
    There’s quite a bit in it, though. He’s not at all happy with what’s going on, disagrees with the expulsion of moderates, favours No Deal purely as a negotiating lever (in other words, he wouldn’t actually deliver it) and is playing a strong unity card. This is pretty unprecedented speaking out from the runner up in a leadership election that finished barely six weeks ago.

    His first thought there is to position himself as a unity candidate if (huge if) Boris were to resign or to be forced to resign as Tory party leader, but in this emergency case scenario that I’ve outlined that could also be offered -to use his words, generously and magnanimously - across party lines in the national interest, and he’d be able to say he was the one that finally delivered Brexit too.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,514
    edited September 9

    Nigelb said:

    It’s an interesting idea, Casino, but it seems exceedingly unlikely, and would represent such a dramatic change of stance from Hunt that it’s hard to see how he might get the backing of naturally suspicious Labour MPs over any of the other alternatives.

    And would they really vote for a WA they have consistently voted against, in preference to trying for some other hail Mary solution ?

    One thing you are almost certainly right about us that a lot of talk will be going on during prorogation about an alternate PM, since, only that might provide the ‘change of circumstances’ required by the French to agree to an extension.
    That would, of course, need to come with a more or less off the shelf plan, too. Norway style solution rather than May’s WA ?

    Norway, of course, would make a great deal more sense from the POV of both the SNP and the Lib Dems.

    In this scenario, failure to agree any extension at the European council meeting on 17-18th October - the only place it can be agreed - the doomsday clock has only 13 days left to tick. There is no time left to try for some other Hail Mary solution. Revoke or the Deal on the table will be the only two solutions left, or it’s a No Deal Brexit by default.

    Is it possible that all the MPs who oppose it won’t be able to see that their only chance to stop it is to pull together as one, and organise themselves to form an administration, yet alone make it work?

    Yes, absolutely. But they do now have several weeks during prorogation where the smarter ones will work this out.

    They aren’t going to spend much time at Conference Party fringe events this year.
    Revoke is a dumb option. Return to a position that generated all the angst and anti EU feelings. Only it will be worse long term as the agenda for the Euro currency core will dominate and marginalise U. K. further.

    The deal that has failed to gain support for two reasons, political advantage and questions over the content. Adopting it now will open lots of politicians up to negative messages.

    If we want to be in, go for the Euro and full fat membership. If we don't, then leave, and look at EEA / EFTA at leisure.

    In the short term the extremes could be the best options.
  • eekeek Posts: 5,520
    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549

    kle4 said:

    Good thread. Hunt has kept his head down in this imbroglio and so far has only tweeted this:



    Looks like a milquetoast 'I dont like what's going on but also have no alternatives so will just meaninglessly plead for unity' kind of response.
    There’s quite a bit in it, though. He’s not at all happy with what’s going on, disagrees with the expulsion of moderates, favours No Deal purely as a negotiating lever (in other words, he wouldn’t actually deliver it) and is playing a strong unity card. This is pretty unprecedented speaking out from the runner up in a leadership election that finished barely six weeks ago.

    His first thought there is to position himself as a unity candidate if (huge if) Boris were to resign or to be forced to resign as Tory party leader, but in this emergency case scenario that I’ve outlined that could also be offered -to use his words, generously and magnanimously - across party lines in the national interest, and he’d be able to say he was the one that finally delivered Brexit too.
    The other day I got 80/1 on Hunt via Ladbrokes odds boost. Tories made a major mistake choosing Johnson over Hunt, and it is a choice that will break the party.

    The attraction of Revoke is that it is purely in our hands and can be done expeditiously, unlike the other options, and doesn't preclude those at a later stage. Not likely though.

    More shenanigans today no doubt.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626
    “ They will be out of options, except one: to strip control from the Executive, and form an alternative administration. That administration will be left with two choices: to either pass whatever is on the table from the EU, at that stage, or to revoke A50.l

    Lol - this group of MPs will never pass a deal.

    The more obvious solution is to change our MPs.
  • houndtanghoundtang Posts: 324
    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 10,549
    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    The Tory rebels had voted 3 times to Leave, while the PM voted against.

    There are plenty of anti No Dealers who want Brexit, just not at any price.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 30,182
    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers, Tories who previously voted for May’s Deal and some moderate Tory Leavers too.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129

    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers
    Hoey and Corbyn on their own don't outweigh the PLP.
  • A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
    Thank you for demonstrating the author’s point!
    And thanks for illustrating my point.
  • CatMan said:

    It's the answer we've all been waiting for!

    Thatcher's message from beyond the grave: it's hot down here.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,940
    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,626

    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers, Tories who previously voted for May’s Deal and some moderate Tory Leavers too.
    Jezza will never allow it so non starter.
  • https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/a-reminder-of-all-the-brexiteers-who-appeared-in-the-paradise-papers-as-eu-tax-avoidance-legislation-looms/03/09/

    Thank God a coalition of wealthy tax avoiders are on hand to rescue us from the liberal metropolitan elite and their fiendish European ways.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    It didn't include the entire Commission bureaucracy being buggered with a live cattle prod.

    And that's it, really.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    Sorry, I am just not seeing this at all. Even if we get to the point of a GNU it is indeed more likely to be led by an ex Tory than a Tory. Hunt doesn't qualify. I also think given the remainer dominance of the HoC it is going to have to be a Tory with a consistent record of opposing Brexit. Someone who supported Cameron and then May and then Boris is not going to have any support. There are some Tories that might. Clarke, obviously, but also Grieve and just maybe Amber Rudd.

    Personally, I don't see any of these scenarios playing out in the time scale indicated. If Parliament is determined to stop no deal there would have to be a VoNC today, not in October. The view has been expressed that even if Parliament is prorogued it can be recalled and an application to recall it so that an alternative administration with a clear majority can have a resolution passed in terms of the FTPA allowing it to take office would clearly be granted.

    Whether the opposition has been sufficiently galvanised by Boris remains to be seen. Rats in a sack probably have more common purpose than we have seen to date.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129

    CatMan said:

    It's the answer we've all been waiting for!

    Thatcher's message from beyond the grave: it's hot down here.
    Interesting to note how 30 years after leaving office Thatcher is still the target of such bile and anger. It puzzles me a bit. Brown did far more damage to far more people than Thatcher did but I doubt if he'll get the same vitriol when he snuffs it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,129

    https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/a-reminder-of-all-the-brexiteers-who-appeared-in-the-paradise-papers-as-eu-tax-avoidance-legislation-looms/03/09/

    Thank God a coalition of wealthy tax avoiders are on hand to rescue us from the liberal metropolitan elite and their fiendish European ways.

    It's noble of Ian Lavery to take part.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    People had different reasons to argue against it. For many of the public, the fact that Farage said it was a betrayal was enough: and sadly, we're in a situation where he - and almost he alone - can define what Brexit is.

    For some others (mainly within the Conservative Party), it was about power and personal ambition.

    For others (mainly in opposition), it was not to give the Conservatives the advantage of saying that they'd delivered Brexit.

    In other words, not much: but people are playing games with our futures and f**king up the country. And that's just the leavers ...
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 15,940

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    People had different reasons to argue against it. For many of the public, the fact that Farage said it was a betrayal was enough: and sadly, we're in a situation where he - and almost he alone - can define what Brexit is.

    For some others (mainly within the Conservative Party), it was about power and personal ambition.

    For others (mainly in opposition), it was not to give the Conservatives the advantage of saying that they'd delivered Brexit.

    In other words, not much: but people are playing games with our futures and f**king up the country. And that's just the leavers ...
    Much obliged Mr J! rather what I thought!

    I felt when it was offered that it was as good as we could get, and would give us the chance of Returning once we had, collectively, come to our senses.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    Has anyone considered that the Govt's "cunning plan" might be to request and be granted an extension to Article 50, but not actually bring the relevant legislation through Parliament (I believe there has to be some)? ie. as the legal departure date is Oct 31st this can't be changed simply by agreement between Governments.

    Also is there any significance in the piece of paper that Barclay signed a week or so ago, which the Brexiteers were making a lot of (claiming it made Oct 31st departure 'irreversible' - or something close to?)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    The majority of leavers voted for May's deal consistently. The self styled Spartans didn't like the fact that it was still possible that we might be able to remain in the SM and CU and didn't think our government had done a terribly good job of negotiating the leaving costs, I think. There is so much phlegm, weird twists of thought and outright incoherence when they speak that it is hard to follow.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    BTW there is another way - have a frickin' election on October 15th! It's been the only consistent Labour policy for 2 years ffs! (until the last week). Whatever happened to "ignore the polls, everything will look very different after an election campaign". If we're going to have the possibility of no deal, at least make it unambiguously the Government's choice, put to the electorate, debated in the heat of an election campaign.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,404
    edited September 9
    DavidL said:

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    The majority of leavers voted for May's deal consistently. The self styled Spartans didn't like the fact that it was still possible that we might be able to remain in the SM and CU and didn't think our government had done a terribly good job of negotiating the leaving costs, I think. There is so much phlegm, weird twists of thought and outright incoherence when they speak that it is hard to follow.
    And the Labour leavers didn't like the fact that it was negotiated by a Tory Government. No more no less.

    Spartans rejected it because any agreement that the EU would agree to must be a bad deal. QED.

    Labour rejected it because any agreement that the Tories would agree must be a bad deal. QED.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,278
    edited September 9

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    The problem with the May Deal for the loons is that it did not represent a "defeat" for the EU. The EU is the enemy, therefore the UK can only truly Leave it "wins". And a victory is leaving on terms the EU has not set. In other words, No Deal. Of course, when that happens we will move to betrayal - because it was not done properly.

  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548
    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    Does it give two years I thought the end of transition was hard coded as Dec 31 2020?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    Seems a fair summary of the polarised feelings, but given the country is split down the middle on the issue, to call it one of ‘popular sovereignty’ is mere rhetoric.
  • eekeek Posts: 5,520
    alex. said:

    BTW there is another way - have a frickin' election on October 15th! It's been the only consistent Labour policy for 2 years ffs! (until the last week). Whatever happened to "ignore the polls, everything will look very different after an election campaign". If we're going to have the possibility of no deal, at least make it unambiguously the Government's choice, put to the electorate, debated in the heat of an election campaign.

    Because the polls look better after October 31st for any party which isn't the Tory party.

    And thanks to the FTPA an election is not in the Government control.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    alex. said:

    DavidL said:

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    The majority of leavers voted for May's deal consistently. The self styled Spartans didn't like the fact that it was still possible that we might be able to remain in the SM and CU and didn't think our government had done a terribly good job of negotiating the leaving costs, I think. There is so much phlegm, weird twists of thought and outright incoherence when they speak that it is hard to follow.
    And the Labour leavers didn't like the fact that it was negotiated by a Tory Government. No more no less.
    Well in fairness they had a bit of a point. Which is why May should have had the negotiating team cross party from the start. The list of her mistakes and bad judgment is long and detailed but for me that is right at the top.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 26,673
    Any coalition of the unwilling is going to be led by either Jeremy Corbyn or by someone acceptable to him. So look at the Labour grandees. Margaret Beckett, Harriet Harman and Ed Miliband look most plausible.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312
    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    I'm fully in favour of May's deal. However I think it - and any other deal - is dead in the water.

    Why? Because they all rely on important negotiations in good faith. And sadly, we as a country have shown f-all good faith throughout this mess. The EU countries cannot trust that anything they negotiate with us will be able to get through own own parliament.

    There'll be a time when they just say: "sod you, just go."

    And who could blame them?
  • eekeek Posts: 5,520
    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    I said no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. May's deal won't pass as if it could we would have been there now.

    Personally a May's Deal or Remain referendum is just about the only way out of this mess.Although as you point out May's Deal actually only delays the final decision 2 more years.

    Leave would be too stupid to argue for May's deal so we would probably end up remaining due to a boycott.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 72

    Sadly, we're in a situation where [Farage] - and almost he alone - can define what Brexit is.

    Untrue. We're actually in a position where 12% of the population think only Farage can define what Brexit is - but Farage has failed to get a single candidate elected since May, and has so mismanaged his campaigning that from Peterborough to Coventry every single Brexit candidate has boosted the performance of candidates opposing his minority obsession.

    Farage, Johnson and Cummings are all now busted flushes, sustained only by each others' hype and the foreign-owned press.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    nichomar said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    Does it give two years I thought the end of transition was hard coded as Dec 31 2020?
    Tbh I am not sure. It was 31st December 2020 when we were leaving in March. Not at all sure what the effect of the extension was, if anything. I think it would also be extended but whether that has actually been agreed I don't know.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,084

    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers, Tories who previously voted for May’s Deal and some moderate Tory Leavers too.
    With the lib dems in it? I don't think so
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,312
    DavidL said:

    alex. said:

    DavidL said:

    Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    The majority of leavers voted for May's deal consistently. The self styled Spartans didn't like the fact that it was still possible that we might be able to remain in the SM and CU and didn't think our government had done a terribly good job of negotiating the leaving costs, I think. There is so much phlegm, weird twists of thought and outright incoherence when they speak that it is hard to follow.
    And the Labour leavers didn't like the fact that it was negotiated by a Tory Government. No more no less.
    Well in fairness they had a bit of a point. Which is why May should have had the negotiating team cross party from the start. The list of her mistakes and bad judgment is long and detailed but for me that is right at the top.
    Would you care to point out where you said that at the time, and not with hindsight? Just one comment?

    Besides, it's just another scenario where too much could have gone wrong. For one thing, it would have done nothing to staunch the ERGers or BXPers hatred of any deal that is not the EU surrendering to us and giving us Spain and France. ;)
  • houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    Maybe it will be a GOND. Government of national disunity.

    We really do need a GE ASAP.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 30,182
    ydoethur said:

    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers
    Hoey and Corbyn on their own don't outweigh the PLP.
    Indeed, but that wasn’t the question. It was about what Leaver support it would have.

    It obviously couldn’t work without the bulk of the Labour Party also behind it too.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 30,182
    timmo said:

    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers, Tories who previously voted for May’s Deal and some moderate Tory Leavers too.
    With the lib dems in it? I don't think so

    If you read my thread header again you’ll see i expressly said the Lib Dems wouldn’t be in it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566

    Nigelb said:

    It’s an interesting idea, Casino, but it seems exceedingly unlikely, and would represent such a dramatic change of stance from Hunt that it’s hard to see how he might get the backing of naturally suspicious Labour MPs over any of the other alternatives.

    And would they really vote for a WA they have consistently voted against, in preference to trying for some other hail Mary solution ?

    One thing you are almost certainly right about us that a lot of talk will be going on during prorogation about an alternate PM, since, only that might provide the ‘change of circumstances’ required by the French to agree to an extension.
    That would, of course, need to come with a more or less off the shelf plan, too. Norway style solution rather than May’s WA ?

    Norway, of course, would make a great deal more sense from the POV of both the SNP and the Lib Dems.

    In this scenario, failure to agree any extension at the European council meeting on 17-18th October - the only place it can be agreed - the doomsday clock has only 13 days left to tick. There is no time left to try for some other Hail Mary solution. Revoke or the Deal on the table will be the only two solutions left, or it’s a No Deal Brexit by default.

    Is it possible that all the MPs who oppose it won’t be able to see that their only chance to stop it is to pull together as one, and organise themselves to form an administration, yet alone make it work?

    Yes, absolutely. But they do now have several weeks during prorogation where the smarter ones will work this out.

    They aren’t going to spend much time at Conference Party fringe events this year.
    I’m not arguing the logic (other than that of Hunt as the figurehead); rather the emotions of the participants.

    I note that McDonnell was interviewed over the weekend as saying Labour would seek to bring back the WA ‘with minor tweaks’ as there isn’t time for a renegotiation (Corbyn’s views are a little more opaque), so that gives support to your proposition.
    I’m still not quite seeing how the SNP and LibDems come on board with that, though nothing is impossible.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    I'm fully in favour of May's deal. However I think it - and any other deal - is dead in the water.

    Why? Because they all rely on important negotiations in good faith. And sadly, we as a country have shown f-all good faith throughout this mess. The EU countries cannot trust that anything they negotiate with us will be able to get through own own parliament.

    There'll be a time when they just say: "sod you, just go."

    And who could blame them?
    It would be very helpful if they did this now and further extensions were effectively taken off the table. On a binary choice of deal or no deal the deal would pass. Whether Boris would remain as PM in that scenario is less clear but it is possible.

    I am not sure that we have shown bad faith. We have just been totally incoherent and unable to show any consistency of purpose which makes negotiating with us a bit of a nightmare.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 2,548
    DavidL said:

    nichomar said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    Does it give two years I thought the end of transition was hard coded as Dec 31 2020?
    Tbh I am not sure. It was 31st December 2020 when we were leaving in March. Not at all sure what the effect of the extension was, if anything. I think it would also be extended but whether that has actually been agreed I don't know.
    I don’t think the end date moved with the extension but not sure.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566
    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    b) would certainly be an easier sell to the remain parties.
  • A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
    A perfect illustration of what the article was saying.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 12,993
    Interesting article - Casino adds to the roster of good leading article writers. The Tories could do a lot worse than Hunt (my local MP and an agreeable guy), but I can't see the Opposition going for it. They might just swallow Clarke or another expellee if Corbyn can't get a majority, but not a mainstream Tory. I agree hre's a tempting bet at 66-1 though, especially as you also cover the possibility that Johnson quits in circumstances not involving losing a General election - Hunt would be the obvious standin.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 4,489

    Any coalition of the unwilling is going to be led by either Jeremy Corbyn or by someone acceptable to him. So look at the Labour grandees. Margaret Beckett, Harriet Harman and Ed Miliband look most plausible.

    Ed Miliband coming in to bring order to the chaos would be peak 2019.
  • TGOHF said:

    “ They will be out of options, except one: to strip control from the Executive, and form an alternative administration. That administration will be left with two choices: to either pass whatever is on the table from the EU, at that stage, or to revoke A50.l

    Lol - this group of MPs will never pass a deal.

    The more obvious solution is to change our MPs.

    Well the best solution would be to change all the ERG thickos, seeing as they blocked the WA. Sadly not going to happen.
  • Things have been going round and round so fast I'm getting confused. Apart from the N Irish 'backstop', what, for the majority of Leavers was wrong with May's Deal?

    I don't think that, for the majority of leavers, there was much seriously wrong with it at all. But the majority of Leavers have as much influence on this process as the majority of Remainers.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 26,673
    edited September 9

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Few people have trashed their own reputations in Brexit as Robert Tombs has. That’s a really poor article.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 14,566

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
    A perfect illustration of what the article was saying.
    The caricatures on both sides are complete nonsense.
    The country is split down the middle, and while there might be overall differences in social class, wealth, average age, or education, it is absurd to pretend a monopoly of vice or virtue on either.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780
    nichomar said:

    DavidL said:

    nichomar said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    Does it give two years I thought the end of transition was hard coded as Dec 31 2020?
    Tbh I am not sure. It was 31st December 2020 when we were leaving in March. Not at all sure what the effect of the extension was, if anything. I think it would also be extended but whether that has actually been agreed I don't know.
    I don’t think the end date moved with the extension but not sure.
    I think we would need to change it, possibly to even longer than was originally contemplated. There is still a lot of detail to be agreed about the nature of our future relationship with the EU and we would need an election and (hopefully) the creation of a clear majority government who would be able to make decisions before anything useful could be done.
  • timmo said:

    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers, Tories who previously voted for May’s Deal and some moderate Tory Leavers too.
    With the lib dems in it? I don't think so

    If you read my thread header again you’ll see i expressly said the Lib Dems wouldn’t be in it.
    Congrats on the good header. I don't think Hunt will go for it to be honest. I don't know him but know a couple of his supporters. I suspect he will keep his head down in the hope he can genuinely come to the rescue well after Boris has well and truly screwed up, which is a certainty.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 15,118
    Thank you @Casino_Royale for an interesting header.

    Meanwhile Rory continues to try and make his elevator pitch -

    Will be on @BBCr4today at 0713 this morning. We should not be simply a negative force, opposing no-deal but instead making a positive case for the energy and strength of the centre ground and a moderate, pragmatic approach to Brexit and politics.

    — Rory Stewart (@RoryStewartUK) September 9, 2019
    And Lord Sumption shreds all the various idiotic ideas put forward by some of the Borisites to undermine the extension law.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 26,780

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Few people have trashed their own reputations in Brexit as Robert Tombs has. That’s a really poor article.
    Oh I don't know about that first sentence.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,520

    Any coalition of the unwilling is going to be led by either Jeremy Corbyn or by someone acceptable to him. So look at the Labour grandees. Margaret Beckett, Harriet Harman and Ed Miliband look most plausible.

    Maybe in the future Corbyn will be able to say he was a moron for nominating Beckett.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33625612
  • It would require:

    1) EU not to agree extension (20%? and that feels toppy)
    2) SNP & LD to abstain in that scenario (10%)
    3) Hunt chosen ahead of Clarke, Hammond, Stewart of similar standing and more acceptable to other parties having stood up against the tory leadership (5%)

    So as scripted a negligible chance, however the bet could win in other ways, most likely Tories get a small majority and leadership challenge within a couple of years allows Hunt to campaign as the unifying and competent tory leader not tainted by the failed Johnson era. I think that is more likely than the scenario described and also enough to make him value at 66/1.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 42
    As someone who suspects Dom C has something up his sleeve, it is curious that the gov called the hounds off and allowed the bill to pass the Lords last week. Any ideas why they did this? Maybe gov has seen something in the legislation?

    What is the significance of the Kinnock Amendment that slipped through?
  • isamisam Posts: 27,683

    Nigelb said:

    It’s an interesting idea, Casino, but it seems exceedingly unlikely, and would represent such a dramatic change of stance from Hunt that it’s hard to see how he might get the backing of naturally suspicious Labour MPs over any of the other alternatives.

    And would they really vote for a WA they have consistently voted against, in preference to trying for some other hail Mary solution ?

    One thing you are almost certainly right about us that a lot of talk will be going on during prorogation about an alternate PM, since, only that might provide the ‘change of circumstances’ required by the French to agree to an extension.
    That would, of course, need to come with a more or less off the shelf plan, too. Norway style solution rather than May’s WA ?

    Norway, of course, would make a great deal more sense from the POV of both the SNP and the Lib Dems.

    In this scenario, failure to agree any extension at the European council meeting on 17-18th October - the only place it can be agreed - the doomsday clock has only 13 days left to tick. There is no time left to try for some other Hail Mary solution. Revoke or the Deal on the table will be the only two solutions left, or it’s a No Deal Brexit by default.

    Is it possible that all the MPs who oppose it won’t be able to see that their only chance to stop it is to pull together as one, and organise themselves to form an administration, yet alone make it work?

    Yes, absolutely. But they do now have several weeks during prorogation where the smarter ones will work this out.

    They aren’t going to spend much time at Conference Party fringe events this year.
    “15/1 or even 12/1”

    Must be trolling 🙄
  • A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
    A perfect illustration of what the article was saying.
    The Culture Wars: a Tragedy in Several Acts

    Leaver: you think we're all stupid don't you?

    Remainer: not at all!

    Leaver: [says something stupid]

    Remainer: actually, that was kind of stupid.

    Leaver: Gotcha!

    [Repeat as infinitum]
  • DavidL said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    They have done everything to stop no deal except the one thing that actually would stop it - pass the freaking deal.

    If the result is no deal, that's their fault and every MP who voted against it, including Johnson, deserves to lose their seats.

    There is currently no deal that would pass agreed by the EU. The only choice last week was to rule out No Deal and that would probably have failed except for proroguing parliament forcing minds to make a decision.
    There is May's deal. Which is still by far our best option. It would give us another 2 years to (a) find an alternative to the backstop (b) decide actually remaining in the CU and SM is not such a bad idea so lets go down the EFTA route, (c) think sod it, we are not doing any of this and have the equivalent of a no deal Brexit at that point. Personally I think that we would end up with a version of (b). Which would seem a reasonable result given the closeness of the vote.
    +1. I have said this all along. It is an indication of the general stupidity of the ERG that they haven't figured that they could still amend to their idea of utopia after we had left under the WA. One can only conclude that they were worried that when this had happened everyone would be quite happy with it and their cause of alt-right Albion would be lost for ever.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,677
    This is the fundamental issue with all this app political chicanery

    If Parliament doesn’t want No Deal it should sack the Executive

    It’s a clear an unambiguous right of Parliament

    And yet they bend and break the rules because they are afraid of the consequences
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 19,795
    Great header thanks @Casino.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,193
    ydoethur said:

    CatMan said:

    It's the answer we've all been waiting for!

    Thatcher's message from beyond the grave: it's hot down here.
    Interesting to note how 30 years after leaving office Thatcher is still the target of such bile and anger. It puzzles me a bit. Brown did far more damage to far more people than Thatcher did but I doubt if he'll get the same vitriol when he snuffs it.
    That's an entirely subjective opinion and one I don't think many in the north or certainly in Scotland would share
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,520

    CatMan said:

    It's the answer we've all been waiting for!

    Thatcher's message from beyond the grave: it's hot down here.
    “I am the Hot Iron Lady.”

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,278
    edited September 9
    One thing missing in Casino Royale's fascinating article is that if he fails to get a deal fromt he EU at the European Council meeting Johnson has to request an extension by 19th October. If he doesn't, then he is breaking the law. At that poijnt the courts will get involved and, presumably, those Tory ministers and MPs who believe in the rule of law will resign.

    An interesting point is whether not obeying the law while in public office disqualifies people from seeking public office. Does anyone know? If so, quite a few political careers could be ending quite soon.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,084

    timmo said:

    houndtang said:

    Still doesn't explain how a GONU represents those who actually want to Leave. As will obviously be a Remain government. So where's the NU bit of that?

    This is a GONU that will actually be delivering Brexit, not revoking or delaying it.

    I expect it would have support from Labour Leavers, Tories who previously voted for May’s Deal and some moderate Tory Leavers too.
    With the lib dems in it? I don't think so

    If you read my thread header again you’ll see i expressly said the Lib Dems wouldn’t be in it.
    Apologies..
    On vanilla I can only see.headline and first para on my phone
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,988
    Mr. Boy, ahem. It was mostly pro-EU MPs who opposed the deal, and are now aghast that that might mean we leave without a deal...

    Tomfoolery doesn't belong to one side alone.
  • isamisam Posts: 27,683
    edited September 9

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
    A perfect illustration of what the article was saying.
    The more extreme Remainers have spent years telling themselves, and virtue signalling to others, how considerate and empathetic to people less fortunate than themselves they are, whilst the type of people who voted Leave played the role of bad guy in their minds. This seems to make it impossible for them to realise that they are, or could even be capable of being, the villains of the piece now
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,988
    Mr. Observer, the recall law could come into play too.
  • eekeek Posts: 5,520

    Mr. Boy, ahem. It was mostly pro-EU MPs who opposed the deal, and are now aghast that that might mean we leave without a deal...

    Tomfoolery doesn't belong to one side alone.

    Once again - it was not the job of the opposition to support May's deal - once May unilaterally decided on her red lines and created her plan it was up to her to get her party to vote for it.

    Given that she failed to do that why should any other party vote for a deal created by a party that won't accept it.
  • Charles said:

    This is the fundamental issue with all this app political chicanery

    If Parliament doesn’t want No Deal it should sack the Executive

    It’s a clear an unambiguous right of Parliament

    And yet they bend and break the rules because they are afraid of the consequences

    Imo they dont do it out of loyalty to the tory party (not consequence related, based on loyalty) and not wanting to be seen to help Corbyn (partially consequence related, but more perception as it will be Corbyn constrained not Corbyn unleashed so short term consequences can be controlled).

    If push comes to shove they will replace the executive but it will be a last resort.

    Without party ties we would surely have left on a soft brexit by now, 70% of the country would accept it (even if not delighted by it) and our relationship with Europe would slip back in importance to a top 5/10 issue rather than the only thing that matters.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 24,677
    A side letter isn’t “legally illiterate”

    It has no legal force but it could be politically significant
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,520
    isam said:

    A Very British Constitutional Crisis https://nyti.ms/2A5Duyp

    Interesting article- given it’s from a Leave supporter it makes an interesting change from the NYT’s usual take.

    The two sides in the debate are coming to loathe each other. For the “Leave” side (which is my side), our national system of democracy is at stake: For the first time since Britain became a truly democratic country, the political and cultural establishment is refusing under a variety of pretexts to obey a legal popular vote. On the “Remain” side, it seems to have become less about loving the European Union than detesting those who are against it, seen as deplorables who must not be allowed to win.

    So “parliamentary sovereignty” has been pitted against “popular sovereignty,” in this case championed by the Johnson government. It is not yet clear how our constitution will cope with this fight between two conceptions of democracy. Who will have the final say — the people or the establishment?
    So Leavers love democracy, and Remainers are snobs. If this is what passes for nuanced analysis on the Leave side, maybe they really are as dumb as Remainers apparently think they are.
    A perfect illustration of what the article was saying.
    The more extreme Remainers have spent years telling themselves, and virtue signalling to others, how considerate and empathetic to people less fortunate than themselves they are, whilst the type of people who voted Leave played the role of bad guy in their minds. This seems to make it impossible for them to realise that they are, or could even be capable of being, the villains of the piece now
    No-one is more guilty of caricaturing Leave voters as being anti-immigration than you.
  • eekeek Posts: 5,520

    ydoethur said:

    CatMan said:

    It's the answer we've all been waiting for!

    Thatcher's message from beyond the grave: it's hot down here.
    Interesting to note how 30 years after leaving office Thatcher is still the target of such bile and anger. It puzzles me a bit. Brown did far more damage to far more people than Thatcher did but I doubt if he'll get the same vitriol when he snuffs it.
    That's an entirely subjective opinion and one I don't think many in the north or certainly in Scotland would share
    Browns damage is far less obvious (it wasn't Police attacking striking miners) and for a lot of people it looks like he did good as he gave them money.

    Remember people remember bad things that happen to them..
  • Charles said:

    A side letter isn’t “legally illiterate”

    It has no legal force but it could be politically significant
    The EU may already somehow be aware the govt do not like the extension (in public at least) without the need for that to be expressed in a letter.
This discussion has been closed.