Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will Dominic Cummings still be senior adviser to Boris Johnson

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited October 6 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will Dominic Cummings still be senior adviser to Boris Johnson on New Year’s Day?

This market by Paddy Power on Boris Johnson’s adviser Dominic Cummings should attract a lot of attention given the prominence of Mr Cummings and his publicity shy nature that can only be rivalled by Paddy Power.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Plaid moving towards ' Revoke '. Interesting to see where the SNP end up.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-49940325
  • The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour
  • The Greening of Paris Makes Its Mayor More Than a Few Enemies https://nyti.ms/2VdCems
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,456

    The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour

    Labour seems to have lost almost all of its leave voters... if that's true then presumably there are going to be some new places going Tory in the coming election.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,126
    rkrkrk said:

    The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour

    Labour seems to have lost almost all of its leave voters... if that's true then presumably there are going to be some new places going Tory in the coming election.
    I read that only 8% of leave voters will vote Labour. You are right, the next election is going to be very interesting.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 22,938
    RobD said:

    rkrkrk said:

    The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour

    Labour seems to have lost almost all of its leave voters... if that's true then presumably there are going to be some new places going Tory in the coming election.
    I read that only 8% of leave voters will vote Labour. You are right, the next election is going to be very interesting.
    Someone needs to do some constituency-level polling, because the headline party numbers could mean almost anything at the moment.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631
    'brings in someone else with the title of say ‘principle adviser’'

    I like this idea. Given that neither Johnson nor Cummings have any principles, they urgently need someone to fill such a role.

    On topic, while Cummings has been an abject and terrible failure, can Johnson afford to admit that? Their fates are quite closely bound up together. If Cummings walks before an election, Johnson is probably finished. That alone makes it an unattractive market.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 25,081
    ydoethur said:

    'brings in someone else with the title of say ‘principle adviser’'

    I like this idea. Given that neither Johnson nor Cummings have any principles, they urgently need someone to fill such a role.

    On topic, while Cummings has been an abject and terrible failure, can Johnson afford to admit that? Their fates are quite closely bound up together. If Cummings walks before an election, Johnson is probably finished. That alone makes it an unattractive market.

    Cummings has always said he is going anyway. He’s got surgery coming up and promised Mary he’d get it done this year.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 25,081

    The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour

    Do they have the tables?

    Big(gish) 3 only on 76%

    Let’s assume that the nationalists and odds&sods are at 8% in aggregate - I suppose that puts Brexit on 16 which I guess is plausible?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,456
    RobD said:

    rkrkrk said:

    The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour

    Labour seems to have lost almost all of its leave voters... if that's true then presumably there are going to be some new places going Tory in the coming election.
    I read that only 8% of leave voters will vote Labour. You are right, the next election is going to be very interesting.
    My back of the envelope was 8% of leave = 4% of country.
    Labour previous got 40% nationally, with one third of that being leave.
    So they've gone from 13% -> 4%.

    That actually would explain a large part of their polling decline.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,456
    Sort of on topic, watched the Brexit film with Benedict last night. Not that great tbh, although a few funny moments. The ending scene set in 2020 looks particularly weird when you realise he's back in government now.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701
    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,126

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    Depends if we end up staying, doesn't it?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701
    Charles said:

    The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour

    Do they have the tables?

    Big(gish) 3 only on 76%

    Let’s assume that the nationalists and odds&sods are at 8% in aggregate - I suppose that puts Brexit on 16 which I guess is plausible?

    Opinium is the only pollster that regularly gives the No Deal bloc a higher vote share than the anti-No Deal bloc, so it would be very plausible.

  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,500

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    I think if we leave without a deal he will have completely failed as well. Given that the entire strategy was based on the assertion that playing hardball would result in the EU crumbling. Remember all the stuff about May (and in fact Cameron before her) failing because she failed to convince that she was serious about leaving.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701
    alex. said:

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    I think if we leave without a deal he will have completely failed as well. Given that the entire strategy was based on the assertion that playing hardball would result in the EU crumbling. Remember all the stuff about May (and in fact Cameron before her) failing because she failed to convince that she was serious about leaving.

    I totally agree, but it can be spun as a success - he got us out. There’s no spinning a failure to leave.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    It already has failed. Assuming that his strategy was to shut down Parliament, call an election, win a majority and then pass a deal, which is what it seems to have been. But it was always going to fail as it was a stupid strategy that was mutually contradictory. There was never time to have both an election and a deal passed.

    But as for his legend, I would point out that in all his career he has achieved one thing - winning the EU referendum. And that might have been in spite of him rather than because of him.

    Everything else he has tried, in politics or business, has been at best a failure and at worst a fiasco. Just look at his disastrous record in education.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701
    The LibDem candidate in Beaconsfield has confirmed the party will not stand against Dominic Grieve.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 16,229
    ydoethur said:

    'brings in someone else with the title of say ‘principle adviser’'

    I like this idea. Given that neither Johnson nor Cummings have any principles, they urgently need someone to fill such a role.

    On topic, while Cummings has been an abject and terrible failure, can Johnson afford to admit that? Their fates are quite closely bound up together. If Cummings walks before an election, Johnson is probably finished. That alone makes it an unattractive market.

    Well spotted.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 16,229
    ydoethur said:

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    It already has failed. Assuming that his strategy was to shut down Parliament, call an election, win a majority and then pass a deal, which is what it seems to have been. But it was always going to fail as it was a stupid strategy that was mutually contradictory. There was never time to have both an election and a deal passed.

    But as for his legend, I would point out that in all his career he has achieved one thing - winning the EU referendum. And that might have been in spite of him rather than because of him.

    Everything else he has tried, in politics or business, has been at best a failure and at worst a fiasco. Just look at his disastrous record in education.
    Didn't't he lead or manage on the anti side NE Devolution referendum? And the AV one?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 1,955
    Anyone seen Joker?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631
    edited October 6

    ydoethur said:

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    It already has failed. Assuming that his strategy was to shut down Parliament, call an election, win a majority and then pass a deal, which is what it seems to have been. But it was always going to fail as it was a stupid strategy that was mutually contradictory. There was never time to have both an election and a deal passed.

    But as for his legend, I would point out that in all his career he has achieved one thing - winning the EU referendum. And that might have been in spite of him rather than because of him.

    Everything else he has tried, in politics or business, has been at best a failure and at worst a fiasco. Just look at his disastrous record in education.
    Didn't't he lead or manage on the anti side NE Devolution referendum? And the AV one?
    Don't know. But neither of those were ever going to pass anyway. We had a referendum for an elected Mayor of Aberystwyth at the same time as the NE Assembly and that was lost by the same margin without his help.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631
    Andy_JS said:

    Anyone seen Joker?

    No, fortunately. He's quite bad enough in Downing Street, I don't want to see him in Cannock.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 25,081

    ydoethur said:

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    It already has failed. Assuming that his strategy was to shut down Parliament, call an election, win a majority and then pass a deal, which is what it seems to have been. But it was always going to fail as it was a stupid strategy that was mutually contradictory. There was never time to have both an election and a deal passed.

    But as for his legend, I would point out that in all his career he has achieved one thing - winning the EU referendum. And that might have been in spite of him rather than because of him.

    Everything else he has tried, in politics or business, has been at best a failure and at worst a fiasco. Just look at his disastrous record in education.
    Didn't't he lead or manage on the anti side NE Devolution referendum? And the AV one?
    That was Matt Elliott, someone I have a good deal of respect for (he was the guy that originally got me involved with business for Britain)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 51,339
    Good morning, everyone.

    I suppose it depends what Cummings tells the PM his policy is, no?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701
    ydoethur said:

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    It already has failed. Assuming that his strategy was to shut down Parliament, call an election, win a majority and then pass a deal, which is what it seems to have been. But it was always going to fail as it was a stupid strategy that was mutually contradictory. There was never time to have both an election and a deal passed.

    But as for his legend, I would point out that in all his career he has achieved one thing - winning the EU referendum. And that might have been in spite of him rather than because of him.

    Everything else he has tried, in politics or business, has been at best a failure and at worst a fiasco. Just look at his disastrous record in education.

    I totally agree. But a No Deal departure on 31st October can be spun as a success. There is no way to hide from the abject failure of not delivering an outcome that was explicitly promised with no caveats.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,934

    ydoethur said:

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    It already has failed. Assuming that his strategy was to shut down Parliament, call an election, win a majority and then pass a deal, which is what it seems to have been. But it was always going to fail as it was a stupid strategy that was mutually contradictory. There was never time to have both an election and a deal passed.

    But as for his legend, I would point out that in all his career he has achieved one thing - winning the EU referendum. And that might have been in spite of him rather than because of him.

    Everything else he has tried, in politics or business, has been at best a failure and at worst a fiasco. Just look at his disastrous record in education.

    I totally agree. But a No Deal departure on 31st October can be spun as a success. There is no way to hide from the abject failure of not delivering an outcome that was explicitly promised with no caveats.

    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,381
    edited October 6


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states so that they can persuade all the member states to ratify (which wasn't necessary with the WA), it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,934


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 16,229


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 3,224


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    In Leaver’s minds, No Deal means the UK economy is completely unaffected whilst German carmakers go bankrupt and beg us for mercy.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,934


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,500
    There’s only one side in this “negotiation” trying to argue that no deal is not a bad outcome. What the hard Brexiteers have utterly failed to understand (apparently) is that the EU have other competing priorities along with avoiding no deal.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 3,097


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    I thought it was about 12 billion
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,500


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    £770 million a week?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631
    edited October 6


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    That would imply £800 million a week. Even Cummings only claimed £350. In fact isn't the true figure around £10 billion a year? That's not a vast sum in the scheme of the EU budget.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 119

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    In six months' time, no-one will give a stuff whether Britain left on October 31 or not. Who really cares today that the sexpest didn't honour his promise to "lie down in front of bulldozers" to stop LHR3? Mendacity is simply a feature of this creep.

    Assuming the spiv survives politically till then, what he and his puppet master will be praised or blamed for will be the state of Britain since October 31.

    If we leave then or soon after, and we Remainers go quietly, they'll be remembered as the people who got us out - and probably as the nutcases responsible for the ensuing catastrophes.

    If we never leave, they may well be remembered as the devious geniuses who persuaded a country to do the right thing in spite of itself.

    For the thousands of other possible post Oct 31 outcomes: who knows? Because that's the trouble with letting those with severe mental handicaps do real jobs. You can't even trust them to be lying.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,006


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    The net number is about £17bn. £40bn is gross.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,006
    nichomar said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    I thought it was about 12 billion
    You're excluding the share of British VAT receipts that go to Brussels.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,006
    ydoethur said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    That would imply £800 million a week. Even Cummings only claimed £350. In fact isn't the true figure around £10 billion a year? That's not a vast sum in the scheme of the EU budget.
    It's a meaningful, but not enormous, share of the EU budget.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 2,132
    Charles said:

    The Guardian write up of the Opinium numbers sheds light on the topline. Looks like the Lib Dem ' revoke ' pledge provoked a spasm amongst Remain voters which quickly unwound.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/poll-shows-conservative-party-15-points-ahead-of-labour

    Do they have the tables?

    Big(gish) 3 only on 76%

    Let’s assume that the nationalists and odds&sods are at 8% in aggregate - I suppose that puts Brexit on 16 which I guess is plausible?
    Brexit party on 12, greens on 4 acc to Britain elects
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 5,599
    I've noticed some of the Remainers becoming slightly unhinged over Brexit.

    Please remember that the EU project isn't the Messiah. They are being naughty boys, but they genuinely believe in the concept of a united Europe.

    Brexit will never happen, but the lasting effect will be a deep resentment from many voters who will see a referendum being ignored. Pretending that it's all too difficult and farting around for three years fools nobody. It was never going to happen, too many self-important people wouldn't allow it, and anyone who disagrees is an ignorant fool. The will of the people is a recipe for fascism, or even worse - populism.

    I suppose they assume that people will see the error of their ways and come to thank their betters for saving them.

    Somehow I doubt it. There's an old saying with a lot of truth. "A man convinced against his will retains his own opinion still." Even worse, they will never be convinced because the real fascists will never allow it to happen.

    In many ways, it would have been best to let to let Brexit happen and see it fail than block it and lose democratic trust.

  • ydoethur said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    That would imply £800 million a week. Even Cummings only claimed £350. In fact isn't the true figure around £10 billion a year? That's not a vast sum in the scheme of the EU budget.
    Across 500 million or so adults in the EU27, it's about £20 per person to be made up in more tax or less spending. It's a bit of leverage, but not that much, and trying to use it might well cost the UK more than it saves, in reputation if nothing else.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631
    rcs1000 said:

    nichomar said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    I thought it was about 12 billion
    You're excluding the share of British VAT receipts that go to Brussels.
    Why did nobody mention VAT in the campaign?
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    Get well soon SO.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,324
    edited October 6
    ydoethur said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    That would imply £800 million a week. Even Cummings only claimed £350. In fact isn't the true figure around £10 billion a year? That's not a vast sum in the scheme of the EU budget.
    8.125 billion pa. according to ch 4 factchecker at the time.

    £156,250 Million PW

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,221
    edited October 6
    rcs1000 said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    The net number is about £17bn. £40bn is gross.
    So FullFact have got it wrong when they say net number was £8.9bn in 2018?

    https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIoPy_tY2H5QIVmpntCh0wdg84EAAYASAAEgLHK_D_BwE

    The ONS says net figure is £11.0bn but that does not include EU funds that UK companies are able to access.

    Either way the net figure is closer to £10bn than £17bn.

    Thought you were better than that @rcs1000! :wink:
  • ChrisChris Posts: 4,570
    edited October 6

    If we don’t Leave on 31st October the Cummings strategy will have completely failed. He would have no option but to walk away. He will have been humiliated. His legend destroyed. My guess is that he would not go quietly.

    The only certainty is that if he doesn't leave, there will be a little coterie here assuring us that he planned it all that way, and reacting with fury to any criticism of him and the blond buffoon.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 1,684
    Andy_JS said:

    Anyone seen Joker?

    Going today, on the recommendation of several friends. Will let you know in the evening thread!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,006

    rcs1000 said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    The net number is about £17bn. £40bn is gross.
    So FullFact have got it wrong when they say net number was £8.9bn in 2018?

    https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIoPy_tY2H5QIVmpntCh0wdg84EAAYASAAEgLHK_D_BwE

    The ONS says net figure is £11.0bn but that does not include EU funds that UK companies are able to access.

    Either way the net figure is closer to £10bn than £17bn.

    Thought you were better than that @rcs1000! :wink:
    I'm sorry if I'm wrong.

    I apologise if so.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 16,229
    CD13 said:

    I've noticed some of the Remainers becoming slightly unhinged over Brexit.

    Please remember that the EU project isn't the Messiah. They are being naughty boys, but they genuinely believe in the concept of a united Europe.

    Brexit will never happen, but the lasting effect will be a deep resentment from many voters who will see a referendum being ignored. Pretending that it's all too difficult and farting around for three years fools nobody. It was never going to happen, too many self-important people wouldn't allow it, and anyone who disagrees is an ignorant fool. The will of the people is a recipe for fascism, or even worse - populism.

    I suppose they assume that people will see the error of their ways and come to thank their betters for saving them.

    Somehow I doubt it. There's an old saying with a lot of truth. "A man convinced against his will retains his own opinion still." Even worse, they will never be convinced because the real fascists will never allow it to happen.

    In many ways, it would have been best to let to let Brexit happen and see it fail than block it and lose democratic trust.

    I wondered after the referendum if that would be a good idea. Quite concerned now about what might happen on the Irish border, though
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,006
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    nichomar said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    I thought it was about 12 billion
    You're excluding the share of British VAT receipts that go to Brussels.
    Why did nobody mention VAT in the campaign?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union#VAT-based_own_resources[11]

    In addition to the regular contributions members pay "0.3% of their harmonised VAT base into the budget". It's a small but meaningful bump to the regularly discussed number.

    (That's 0.3% from 20% - i.e. 6% of total VAT take)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631
    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
  • StreeterStreeter Posts: 587
    TGOHF2 said:
    It certainly is.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,221
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:


    What is the difference revenue wise for the EU in deal and no deal?

    That's unknown because it will depend how much the British end up paying when they try to ressurect their trading relationship after a No Deal exit, but since the UK will be more desperate for a quick deal than when they negotiated the WA, and they'll need to sweeten the deal for other member states as they'll need to to persuade all the member states to ratify, it's likely to be more than they agreed to in the WA.
    I see, but the EU are fecked either way, surely they are going to be worse of with the UK out than in.. All the other countries are going to have to cough more or some projects will have to be abandoned..
    They're not going to have to continue to pay out on any on-going British projects though. Or does No Deal only work one way?
    We are a net contributor to the tune of 40 billion or so
    The net number is about £17bn. £40bn is gross.
    So FullFact have got it wrong when they say net number was £8.9bn in 2018?

    https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIoPy_tY2H5QIVmpntCh0wdg84EAAYASAAEgLHK_D_BwE

    The ONS says net figure is £11.0bn but that does not include EU funds that UK companies are able to access.

    Either way the net figure is closer to £10bn than £17bn.

    Thought you were better than that @rcs1000! :wink:
    I'm sorry if I'm wrong.

    I apologise if so.
    Ditto, if I'm wrong.

    Question is: if that 0.3% VAT contribution (which would be sizable - circa £6bn) is in addition to the other EU contributions, where does it appear in the Pink Book?

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/bulletins/unitedkingdombalanceofpaymentsthepinkbook/2018
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,935
    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    Bozo said he’s not going even with a VONC . The stench surrounding no 10 is becoming similar to Trumps WH.

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,221
    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    I thought the Cummings plan was for Boris to squat in No.10 after a VoNC until the GE, while the UK crashes out with No Deal (assuming they can find a way to nuetralise the Benn Act)?
  • I'm entertained by the polls. If as suggested the Tories are going to win by a HYUFD-gasm then the Tories would be picking up seats like Stockton South. Yet all the noise on social media is Brexit. The people making said noise are notable Tory dampers and yet every man Jack of them are voting Brexit not Tory this time.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,006
    HYUFD said:
    After the initial "Leave" vote, the EU reached out to us and said (and I'm paraphrasing here):

    As you've voted to Leave, you probably don't want a role setting internal EU rules, and it would probably be worthwhile us creating a position that will be one where the UK and the EU have close cooperation in the future.

    Which led to the creation of the EU Security Commisonar, because it was assumed that the EU and the UK would want to have close arrangements in future.

    I mention this, because this was a demonstration of how (at the beginning of this process), both sides seemed to be wanting to work towards something that worked for everyone.

    Before Steve Baker and Marc Francois and Dominic Grieve fucked things up.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,035
    Charles said:

    ydoethur said:

    'brings in someone else with the title of say ‘principle adviser’'

    I like this idea. Given that neither Johnson nor Cummings have any principles, they urgently need someone to fill such a role.

    On topic, while Cummings has been an abject and terrible failure, can Johnson afford to admit that? Their fates are quite closely bound up together. If Cummings walks before an election, Johnson is probably finished. That alone makes it an unattractive market.

    Cummings has always said he is going anyway. He’s got surgery coming up and promised Mary he’d get it done this year.
    I hear his haemorrhoids are having him removed...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 22,938
    nico67 said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    Bozo said he’s not going even with a VONC . The stench surrounding no 10 is becoming similar to Trumps WH.
    He'll have no choice, if the various groups in Parliament opposed to him can agree on who his replacement as PM should be. Right now, it doesn't look like they can.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 21,631

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    I thought the Cummings plan was for Boris to squat in No.10 after a VoNC until the GE, while the UK crashes out with No Deal (assuming they can find a way to nuetralise the Benn Act)?
    The point is that while a mechanism for getting rid of Johnson exists, it wouldn't actually work in this case. It would lead to a General Election which Labour are desperately trying to avoid, and at the moment the odds are the Tories would win it.

    But that doesn't mean we should rewrite the law to satisfy the hissy fits of dimwitted lawyers. That is the Cummings approach. And to be honest, much though I dislike our politicians, I am a great deal more wary of condescending judges effectively making laws up to enforce their prejudices on the rest of us.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,500
    edited October 6

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    I thought the Cummings plan was for Boris to squat in No.10 after a VoNC until the GE, while the UK crashes out with No Deal (assuming they can find a way to nuetralise the Benn Act)?
    I don’t think that can be the plan - in between all the lines the Govt are saying they will extend. All the talk is designed to encourage the opposition to do something to prevent them having to do so.

    The message to the EU seems to be to do a deal or see the Conservatives cleaning up in an election with a mandate for pursuing no deal if necessary. That is inconsistent with the above plan.

    I think almost all of the Cummings ‘plans’ so far have involved threatening to do things which they either wouldn’t do, or wouldn’t want to do. In the hope that opposition (whether in parliment or the EU) would act to prevent the risk of them doing them. Plan A of course was the pre November election.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 22,938
    edited October 6
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    After the initial "Leave" vote, the EU reached out to us and said (and I'm paraphrasing here):

    As you've voted to Leave, you probably don't want a role setting internal EU rules, and it would probably be worthwhile us creating a position that will be one where the UK and the EU have close cooperation in the future.

    Which led to the creation of the EU Security Commisonar, because it was assumed that the EU and the UK would want to have close arrangements in future.

    I mention this, because this was a demonstration of how (at the beginning of this process), both sides seemed to be wanting to work towards something that worked for everyone.

    Before Steve Baker and Marc Francois and Dominic Grieve fucked things up.
    Also don't forget Enda Kenny's 2016 offer to work together on Irish border proposals, to use technological means rather than physical means to enforce customs when tarrifs and regulations differ between the UK and EU.

    If all sides had kept up the collegiate approach, things would be a lot better now, but sadly at some point soon after the referendum all sides adopted a much more adversarial attitude, so three years later we are where we are.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,324
    edited October 6
    CD13 said:

    I've noticed some of the Remainers becoming slightly unhinged over Brexit.

    Please remember that the EU project isn't the Messiah. They are being naughty boys, but they genuinely believe in the concept of a united Europe.

    Brexit will never happen, but the lasting effect will be a deep resentment from many voters who will see a referendum being ignored. Pretending that it's all too difficult and farting around for three years fools nobody. It was never going to happen, too many self-important people wouldn't allow it, and anyone who disagrees is an ignorant fool. The will of the people is a recipe for fascism, or even worse - populism.

    I suppose they assume that people will see the error of their ways and come to thank their betters for saving them.

    Somehow I doubt it. There's an old saying with a lot of truth. "A man convinced against his will retains his own opinion still." Even worse, they will never be convinced because the real fascists will never allow it to happen.

    In many ways, it would have been best to let to let Brexit happen and see it fail than block it and lose democratic trust.

    Several enlightened decsions like gay marriage removing the death penalty the abortion act and making homosexuality legal needed the generations to move on before they became viable.

    There is a nice legal quotation about changes to the law 'not being affected by the weather of the day but by the climate of the era'. At the moment we are on the cusp. Brexit is an older generation regreting the pssing of an empire. The climate of the era will be very different in a few years time.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,221
    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    I thought the Cummings plan was for Boris to squat in No.10 after a VoNC until the GE, while the UK crashes out with No Deal (assuming they can find a way to nuetralise the Benn Act)?
    I don’t think that can be the plan - in between all the lines the Govt are saying they will extend. All the talk is designed to encourage the opposition to do something to prevent them having to do so.

    The message to the EU seems to be to do a deal or see the Conservatives cleaning up in an election with a mandate for pursuing no deal if necessary. That is inconsistent with the above plan.
    Yebbut...

    From the EU's position: Boris clearly doesn't really want No Deal if he can avoid it; why not therefore allow one more roll of the dice?

    If Boris cleans up in the GE then:

    a) We (the EU) can work with him to finesse his current proposal.
    b) He'll have a stable majority to get his Deal through the HoC.
    c) We'll have more time to prepare for No Deal should all else fail.

    Plus there's got to be an outside chance it all goes pear-shaped for Boris in the GE.

    There's no real downside in extending for the EU.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,035
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    After the initial "Leave" vote, the EU reached out to us and said (and I'm paraphrasing here):

    As you've voted to Leave, you probably don't want a role setting internal EU rules, and it would probably be worthwhile us creating a position that will be one where the UK and the EU have close cooperation in the future.

    Which led to the creation of the EU Security Commisonar, because it was assumed that the EU and the UK would want to have close arrangements in future.

    I mention this, because this was a demonstration of how (at the beginning of this process), both sides seemed to be wanting to work towards something that worked for everyone.

    Before Steve Baker and Marc Francois and Dominic Grieve fucked things up.
    Also don't forget Enda Kenny's 2016 offer to work together on Irish border proposals, to use technological means rather than physical means to enforce customs when tarrifs and regulations differ between the UK and EU.

    If all sides had kept up the collegiate approach, things would be a lot better now, but sadly at some point soon after the referendum all sides adopted a much more adversarial attitude, so three years later we are where we are.
    May's redlines killed all possibility of a bi partisan consensual approach. She decided that the Tories owned Brexit, and shouldn't be surprised that no one else supports it as a result.

    Those counting on a Tory landslide have short memories, not that I expect an election this year:


  • CD13CD13 Posts: 5,599
    Mr Roger,

    Thanks for the reasonable reply, Your arguments does rely on there being an independent truth, removed from human frailties.

    Alas, I doubt that. If you're coming round to faith in a God, congratulations. Otherwise I suspect your optimism may have consumed your common sense.

    Anyway, que sera, sera. It's only politics, not common sense.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701
    HYUFD said:
    Once again, the Brexit loons demonstrate that even now they have no idea how the EU works. The UK can nominate someone to be a commissioner, but the European Parliament has to approve the appointment.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 27,418

    HYUFD said:
    Once again, the Brexit loons demonstrate that even now they have no idea how the EU works. The UK can nominate someone to be a commissioner, but the European Parliament has to approve the appointment.

    They now exactly what they are doing - by making the EU veto our appointments.....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    After the initial "Leave" vote, the EU reached out to us and said (and I'm paraphrasing here):

    As you've voted to Leave, you probably don't want a role setting internal EU rules, and it would probably be worthwhile us creating a position that will be one where the UK and the EU have close cooperation in the future.

    Which led to the creation of the EU Security Commisonar, because it was assumed that the EU and the UK would want to have close arrangements in future.

    I mention this, because this was a demonstration of how (at the beginning of this process), both sides seemed to be wanting to work towards something that worked for everyone.

    Before Steve Baker and Marc Francois and Dominic Grieve fucked things up.
    Also don't forget Enda Kenny's 2016 offer to work together on Irish border proposals, to use technological means rather than physical means to enforce customs when tarrifs and regulations differ between the UK and EU.

    If all sides had kept up the collegiate approach, things would be a lot better now, but sadly at some point soon after the referendum all sides adopted a much more adversarial attitude, so three years later we are where we are.
    May's redlines killed all possibility of a bi partisan consensual approach. She decided that the Tories owned Brexit, and shouldn't be surprised that no one else supports it as a result.

    Those counting on a Tory landslide have short memories, not that I expect an election this year:


    Labour still polling even below that 2017 poll even if the Tories are too.

    Main difference the Brexit Party up more than UKIP were and the LDs also higher.

    Plus of course there will be no dementia tax gaffes etc from Boris unlike May
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 3,256

    HYUFD said:
    Once again, the Brexit loons demonstrate that even now they have no idea how the EU works. The UK can nominate someone to be a commissioner, but the European Parliament has to approve the appointment.

    You think they don't know that? You think they wouldn't relish the confrontation?

    They surely aren't suggesting Nigel for a thoughtful critique of the workings of the EU.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    I'm entertained by the polls. If as suggested the Tories are going to win by a HYUFD-gasm then the Tories would be picking up seats like Stockton South. Yet all the noise on social media is Brexit. The people making said noise are notable Tory dampers and yet every man Jack of them are voting Brexit not Tory this time.

    The Brexit Party are on 12% ie UKIP 2015 levels even with Opinium last night just the Tories are on 38% ie Cameron Tories 2015 levels too
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    HYUFD said:
    Once again, the Brexit loons demonstrate that even now they have no idea how the EU works. The UK can nominate someone to be a commissioner, but the European Parliament has to approve the appointment.

    The UK can just keep nominating Brexiteers then
  • felixfelix Posts: 9,084

    I'm entertained by the polls. If as suggested the Tories are going to win by a HYUFD-gasm then the Tories would be picking up seats like Stockton South. Yet all the noise on social media is Brexit. The people making said noise are notable Tory dampers and yet every man Jack of them are voting Brexit not Tory this time.

    How odd to find the polls entertaining yet take postings on social media seriously.?!?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 1,121
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    After the initial "Leave" vote, the EU reached out to us and said (and I'm paraphrasing here):

    As you've voted to Leave, you probably don't want a role setting internal EU rules, and it would probably be worthwhile us creating a position that will be one where the UK and the EU have close cooperation in the future.

    Which led to the creation of the EU Security Commisonar, because it was assumed that the EU and the UK would want to have close arrangements in future.

    I mention this, because this was a demonstration of how (at the beginning of this process), both sides seemed to be wanting to work towards something that worked for everyone.

    Before Steve Baker and Marc Francois and Dominic Grieve fucked things up.
    Also don't forget Enda Kenny's 2016 offer to work together on Irish border proposals, to use technological means rather than physical means to enforce customs when tarrifs and regulations differ between the UK and EU.

    If all sides had kept up the collegiate approach, things would be a lot better now, but sadly at some point soon after the referendum all sides adopted a much more adversarial attitude, so three years later we are where we are.
    May's redlines killed all possibility of a bi partisan consensual approach. She decided that the Tories owned Brexit, and shouldn't be surprised that no one else supports it as a result.

    Those counting on a Tory landslide have short memories, not that I expect an election this year:


    Labour still polling even below that 2017 poll even if the Tories are too.

    Main difference the Brexit Party up more than UKIP were and the LDs also higher.

    Plus of course there will be no dementia tax gaffes etc from Boris unlike May
    Of course. No gaffes at all. It will all be plain sailing. What are you on?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 13,120
    Sandpit said:

    nico67 said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    Bozo said he’s not going even with a VONC . The stench surrounding no 10 is becoming similar to Trumps WH.
    He'll have no choice, if the various groups in Parliament opposed to him can agree on who his replacement as PM should be. Right now, it doesn't look like they can.
    Well, the suggestion is that he'll tell the Queen "remove me if you dare" even after a VONC. I think it can be parked as meaningless rhetoric. It's certainly true that if no alternative is found an election will follow, and if he lost I don't think even Downing Street are suggesting he'd stay on anyway.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 3,256

    I'm entertained by the polls. If as suggested the Tories are going to win by a HYUFD-gasm then the Tories would be picking up seats like Stockton South. Yet all the noise on social media is Brexit. The people making said noise are notable Tory dampers and yet every man Jack of them are voting Brexit not Tory this time.

    Isn't that consistent with the polls?

    The Tories have lost vote share. The lead comes because Labour have lost more.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,500

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    I thought the Cummings plan was for Boris to squat in No.10 after a VoNC until the GE, while the UK crashes out with No Deal (assuming they can find a way to nuetralise the Benn Act)?
    I don’t think that can be the plan - in between all the lines the Govt are saying they will extend. All the talk is designed to encourage the opposition to do something to prevent them having to do so.

    The message to the EU seems to be to do a deal or see the Conservatives cleaning up in an election with a mandate for pursuing no deal if necessary. That is inconsistent with the above plan.
    Yebbut...

    From the EU's position: Boris clearly doesn't really want No Deal if he can avoid it; why not therefore allow one more roll of the dice?

    If Boris cleans up in the GE then:

    a) We (the EU) can work with him to finesse his current proposal.
    b) He'll have a stable majority to get his Deal through the HoC.
    c) We'll have more time to prepare for No Deal should all else fail.

    Plus there's got to be an outside chance it all goes pear-shaped for Boris in the GE.

    There's no real downside in extending for the EU.
    Of course - like most of the plans it is b*ll*x. All i’m saying is that the talk of Johnson trying to stay as PM and not ask for extension is not actually the plan. Like all of the other plans it is only the “threat” that is the plan, not the execution. Throughout the whole saga of Johnson’s premiership, I think the only thing which has actually been in the “real” plan, was the only thing which from the start he had categorically ruled out ie. a General Election.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 8,862
    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Once again, the Brexit loons demonstrate that even now they have no idea how the EU works. The UK can nominate someone to be a commissioner, but the European Parliament has to approve the appointment.

    The UK can just keep nominating Brexiteers then

    Yep - it will be entirely pointless and utterly harmless, but the UK can certainly do it.

  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 3,256
    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    After the initial "Leave" vote, the EU reached out to us and said (and I'm paraphrasing here):

    As you've voted to Leave, you probably don't want a role setting internal EU rules, and it would probably be worthwhile us creating a position that will be one where the UK and the EU have close cooperation in the future.

    Which led to the creation of the EU Security Commisonar, because it was assumed that the EU and the UK would want to have close arrangements in future.

    I mention this, because this was a demonstration of how (at the beginning of this process), both sides seemed to be wanting to work towards something that worked for everyone.

    Before Steve Baker and Marc Francois and Dominic Grieve fucked things up.
    Also don't forget Enda Kenny's 2016 offer to work together on Irish border proposals, to use technological means rather than physical means to enforce customs when tarrifs and regulations differ between the UK and EU.

    If all sides had kept up the collegiate approach, things would be a lot better now, but sadly at some point soon after the referendum all sides adopted a much more adversarial attitude, so three years later we are where we are.
    May's redlines killed all possibility of a bi partisan consensual approach. She decided that the Tories owned Brexit, and shouldn't be surprised that no one else supports it as a result.

    Those counting on a Tory landslide have short memories, not that I expect an election this year:


    Labour still polling even below that 2017 poll even if the Tories are too.

    Main difference the Brexit Party up more than UKIP were and the LDs also higher.

    Plus of course there will be no dementia tax gaffes etc from Boris unlike May
    Of course. No gaffes at all. It will all be plain sailing. What are you on?
    Of course, there will be gaffes, from all sides.

    And Swinson's Brexit policy (& her ridiculous statement about not accepting the result of a second referendum) will be subjected to rather more scrutiny than so far.

    The LibDems have been, shall we say, extremely fortunate so far -- all the scrutiny has been on Tories and Labour.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 1,121

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing. It’s what most stable conflict resolution consist of.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 27,418
    edited October 6

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    I thought the Cummings plan was for Boris to squat in No.10 after a VoNC until the GE, while the UK crashes out with No Deal (assuming they can find a way to nuetralise the Benn Act)?
    I don’t think that can be the plan - in between all the lines the Govt are saying they will extend. All the talk is designed to encourage the opposition to do something to prevent them having to do so.

    The message to the EU seems to be to do a deal or see the Conservatives cleaning up in an election with a mandate for pursuing no deal if necessary. That is inconsistent with the above plan.
    Yebbut...

    From the EU's position: Boris clearly doesn't really want No Deal if he can avoid it; why not therefore allow one more roll of the dice?

    If Boris cleans up in the GE then:

    a) We (the EU) can work with him to finesse his current proposal.
    b) He'll have a stable majority to get his Deal through the HoC.
    c) We'll have more time to prepare for No Deal should all else fail.

    Plus there's got to be an outside chance it all goes pear-shaped for Boris in the GE.

    There's no real downside in extending for the EU.
    If the EU don't extend, they know they are dealing with the current HoC. Another election and they can have no such assurances.

    If they give Boris some minor tweaks around the back stop, with no extensions, they can force the current HoC to accept it. 95% chance Boris's Deal passes, an optimistic 5% chance that the HoC goes for Revoke (which doesn't mean Brexit has gone away - quite the contrary) and 0% chance of No Deal.

    THAT is the reality that the EU are looking at - as Boris will no doubt be telling them. Get it done by 31st October. For all our sakes. No extensions.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 31,701

    HYUFD said:
    Once again, the Brexit loons demonstrate that even now they have no idea how the EU works. The UK can nominate someone to be a commissioner, but the European Parliament has to approve the appointment.

    You think they don't know that? You think they wouldn't relish the confrontation?

    They surely aren't suggesting Nigel for a thoughtful critique of the workings of the EU.

    MEPs will relish a confrontation too, no doubt. But the impact on the functioning of the Commission and the EU will be zero.

  • eekeek Posts: 5,791
    alex. said:

    alex. said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    I thought the Cummings plan was for Boris to squat in No.10 after a VoNC until the GE, while the UK crashes out with No Deal (assuming they can find a way to nuetralise the Benn Act)?
    I don’t think that can be the plan - in between all the lines the Govt are saying they will extend. All the talk is designed to encourage the opposition to do something to prevent them having to do so.

    The message to the EU seems to be to do a deal or see the Conservatives cleaning up in an election with a mandate for pursuing no deal if necessary. That is inconsistent with the above plan.
    Yebbut...

    From the EU's position: Boris clearly doesn't really want No Deal if he can avoid it; why not therefore allow one more roll of the dice?

    If Boris cleans up in the GE then:

    a) We (the EU) can work with him to finesse his current proposal.
    b) He'll have a stable majority to get his Deal through the HoC.
    c) We'll have more time to prepare for No Deal should all else fail.

    Plus there's got to be an outside chance it all goes pear-shaped for Boris in the GE.

    There's no real downside in extending for the EU.
    Of course - like most of the plans it is b*ll*x. All i’m saying is that the talk of Johnson trying to stay as PM and not ask for extension is not actually the plan. Like all of the other plans it is only the “threat” that is the plan, not the execution. Throughout the whole saga of Johnson’s premiership, I think the only thing which has actually been in the “real” plan, was the only thing which from the start he had categorically ruled out ie. a General Election.
    Which shows how much of an idiot Boris was - he should have called it back in July when there was no excuse to turn down the offer. By leaving his election call to September the opposition was able to deny him.

    As I stated back in June...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 27,418
    DougSeal said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing.
    Look at the Remainer reactions to say the Miller case or the Supreme Court - and tell me there has been no revelling.....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 27,418

    I'm entertained by the polls. If as suggested the Tories are going to win by a HYUFD-gasm then the Tories would be picking up seats like Stockton South. Yet all the noise on social media is Brexit. The people making said noise are notable Tory dampers and yet every man Jack of them are voting Brexit not Tory this time.

    Isn't that consistent with the polls?

    The Tories have lost vote share. The lead comes because Labour have lost more.
    Way, way more.....
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 8,862
    DougSeal said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing. It’s what most stable conflict resolution consist of.
    As a matter of fact I sincerely hope the utter waste they have made of huge swathes of their time here on our beautiful planet gives them cause for reevaluation and hopefully rehabilitation.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 1,121

    DougSeal said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing.
    Look at the Remainer reactions to say the Miller case or the Supreme Court - and tell me there has been no revelling.....
    And the inevitable “yeah, but they did it first...” response - within 10 minutes. Politics of the playground.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 27,418
    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing.
    Look at the Remainer reactions to say the Miller case or the Supreme Court - and tell me there has been no revelling.....
    And the inevitable “yeah, but they did it first...” response - within 10 minutes. Politics of the playground.
    Thank you for making my point......
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 1,121

    DougSeal said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing. It’s what most stable conflict resolution consist of.
    As a matter of fact I sincerely hope the utter waste they have made of huge swathes of their time here on our beautiful planet gives them cause for reevaluation and hopefully rehabilitation.
    Indeed. Insulting your enemy's very existence on the planet after your victory is indeed another sure way to secure a lasting peace. Never fails that one. Also insulting people is a very good way of bring people round to your cause I find.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 25,081
    Streeter said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It certainly is.
    All they have to do is VoNC him

    But they seem unwilling to do so
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 1,121

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing.
    Look at the Remainer reactions to say the Miller case or the Supreme Court - and tell me there has been no revelling.....
    And the inevitable “yeah, but they did it first...” response - within 10 minutes. Politics of the playground.
    Thank you for making my point......
    I think you missed mine.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 25,081
    nico67 said:

    ydoethur said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    It's called a Vote of No Confidence. Even Corbyn knows that, he just dare not call one.
    Bozo said he’s not going even with a VONC . The stench surrounding no 10 is becoming similar to Trumps WH.

    Nope - he said he stays in office until there is someone else proven to have the confidence of the House. Which is constitutional fact - we always have a PM
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 27,418
    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    TGOHF2 said:
    The RAGE of all these Tweetards when we leave will be so delicious.
    Yes, because causing pain to your enemy and revelling in it is the most important thing.
    Look at the Remainer reactions to say the Miller case or the Supreme Court - and tell me there has been no revelling.....
    And the inevitable “yeah, but they did it first...” response - within 10 minutes. Politics of the playground.
    Thank you for making my point......
    I think you missed mine.
    As usual, you didn't make one.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 2,093
    Dont know anything about his policies or popularity but Latvian PM comes across very well on Marr speaking in a foreign language. Puts our politicians (almost) across the board to shame.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 25,081
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    After the initial "Leave" vote, the EU reached out to us and said (and I'm paraphrasing here):

    As you've voted to Leave, you probably don't want a role setting internal EU rules, and it would probably be worthwhile us creating a position that will be one where the UK and the EU have close cooperation in the future.

    Which led to the creation of the EU Security Commisonar, because it was assumed that the EU and the UK would want to have close arrangements in future.

    I mention this, because this was a demonstration of how (at the beginning of this process), both sides seemed to be wanting to work towards something that worked for everyone.

    Before Steve Baker and Marc Francois and Dominic Grieve fucked things up.
    Also don't forget Enda Kenny's 2016 offer to work together on Irish border proposals, to use technological means rather than physical means to enforce customs when tarrifs and regulations differ between the UK and EU.

    If all sides had kept up the collegiate approach, things would be a lot better now, but sadly at some point soon after the referendum all sides adopted a much more adversarial attitude, so three years later we are where we are.
    It was when Leo took over that it all began to go wrong
This discussion has been closed.