Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If LAB shifts a notch on Brexit and backs a CON rebel Commons

135

Comments

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    TOPPING said:

    Yebbut the thing that is sometimes easy to forget, is that we have an optimised for us trade deal in the bag for nearly half our exports. That is the idiocy of trying to jettison that one and create new ones with other countries (including, of course, the EU). It is truly baby and bathwater territory.

    Except of course it is not optimised for us. If it were we not have a massive and growing trade deficit with the rest of the EU which more than wipes our our trade surplus with the rest of the world.
    This is Trumpian trade logic.

    You can optimise your sovereignty by being entirely self-sufficient and not trading with anyone at all, but not many people would like the outcome.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    Speaking at an event on Thursday, McDonnell said Labour was “not supporting membership of ‘the’ customs union, but we are looking at ‘a’ customs union”.

    “The reason we’re saying ‘a’ customs union is because we don’t want the same asymmetric relationship that Turkey have got,” he said.

    The only way to avoid an asymmetric relationship is to remain in the EU.
    Yes, in fact inasmuch as John McDonnell makes any sense at all, he seems to be advocating a very asymmetric relationship. Personally I think it's the least damaging of the poor options potentially available, but we shouldn't kid ourselves that it's anything other than signing up to EU rules (and probably third-party tariffs) on those items covered by any 'customs arrangement' or 'a customs union', or whatever you want to call it.
    Bearing in mind the previous thread, the elephant in the room is that we are heading for a second referendum, and most of the things that are said are positioning for that. Labour are setting impossible tests because they want to be able to reject the deal.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited February 2018
    Since nobody seems to be able to say quite what “a” customs union actually is in the context of the amendment (since it would be open to negotiation), the Govt should just amend it further to append a definition which aligns with what they seek to achieve.
  • Dura_Ace said:



    alex. said:

    What is the difference between "THE" Customs Union and "A" customs union?

    We get to enjoy the May regime for a bit longer with the second one.
    "THE" CU is linked in with the rest of the EU deal and implies regulatory identity (not convergence or non-divergence or equivalence). "A" CU merely means agreement on common tariffs to third parties, plus anything else the participants decide to include. The big plus is that it makes UK-EU trade, specifically in Ireland, very much easier. The big minus is that you can't then run off and agree different tariffs with anyone else, ever.
    It doesn't make UK-EU trade very much easier because you still have NTBs to contend with. These could be eliminated by remaining in the single market or other agreement - a customs union alone does not facilitate the free movement of goods.

    If we do go down this route of a customs union then we might as well remain in the single market - why would you diverge if you can't use that to your advantage internationally?

    At this point we'd be doing a lot of work to in effect recreate the EU from outside its
    formal structures. What is the point? We might as well stay in. I say this as someone who spent countless hours campaigning to leave.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited February 2018

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sandpit said:

    alex. said:

    Sandpit said:

    alex. said:

    Sandpit said:

    alex. said:

    What is the difference between "THE" Customs Union and "A" customs union?

    The Customs Union prevents us from signing our own trade deals.
    Why doesn't "a" customs union (as opposed to some other customs arrangement) prevent that?
    A Customs Union doesn’t exist yet, it would be for us to negotiate it. The CU very much already exists.

    Those talking about A CU really mean a comprehensive customs agreement without remaining in The CU.
    So what is the Brexiteers objection to it? (or is it just about semantics ie. what it is called?).

    If the Govt put a counter amendment rejecting "A Customs union" but advocating "a comprehensive customs agreement out side of The Customs Union" would it pass?
    Providrobably pass.
    Yep I would agree withlike the WTO.
    Are you absolutely sure that a FTA with, say, China won't simply increase our trade deficit? The only growth area for UK exports to there is in services.
    No of course not. It might increase our trade deficit if we went for a bad deal. But the important point is that currently if we want to do any sort of deal with another country it has to be via the EU who are looking to do comprehensive trade deals which satisfy as much of the divergent needs of the 28 member states as possible. This inevitably means that such a deal will not be optimised for the UK.

    The ability to strike our own deals - and they need not be comprehensive FTAs - means that we can negotiate with China (or any other country) on the basis of specific areas that are good for us and for them.

    Yebbut the thing that is sometimes easy to forget, is that we have an optimised for us trade deal in the bag for nearly half our exports. That is the idiocy of trying to jettison that one and create new ones with other countries (including, of course, the EU). It is truly baby and bathwater territory.
    Except of course it is not optimised for us. If it were we not have a massive and growing trade deficit with the rest of the EU which more than wipes our our trade surplus with the rest of the world.
    You need to take that up with the UK consumer. What trade arrangements (with the EU, or anyone for that matter) can you envisage which would reverse that?
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    That was a vote on process of course not substance. We will see how many rebel on actual policy detail.

    This amendment sounds like a Turkey to me. And Turkey only agreed to such a one sided customs union deal as they were desperate to join the EU - we of course are supposed to be leaving it.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,543
    edited February 2018
    MaxPB said:

    alex. said:

    What is the difference between "THE" Customs Union and "A" customs union?

    The Customs Union precludes outside trade relationships without EU involvement, "A" customs union doesn't.
    Not quite. We will NEED to have trade agreements with third parties whether we are in a customs union or not. The main reason for referring to A customs union is deliberate confusion. There needs to be a new document as THE current one only applies to EU members. So formally it is A different union with effectively the same terms.
  • Looking forward to cherry picking and having my cake plus eating it.
  • DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,215
    Is the government still going with the three baskets approach?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    DanSmith said:

    Is the government still going with the three baskets approach?

    Someone this morning described it as Goldilocks, so perhaps 3 bowls...
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    brendan16 said:

    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    That was a vote on process of course not substance. We will see how many rebel on actual policy detail.

    This amendment sounds like a Turkey to me. And Turkey only agreed to such a one sided customs union deal as they were desperate to join the EU - we of course are supposed to be leaving it.
    Indeed. Much easier to justify rebelling when substance isn't the issue.

  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870
    edited February 2018
    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092

    TOPPING said:



    No of course not. It might increase our trade deficit if we went for a bad deal. But the important point is that currently if we want to do any sort of deal with another country it has to be via the EU who are looking to do comprehensive trade deals which satisfy as much of the divergent needs of the 28 member states as possible. This inevitably means that such a deal will not be optimised for the UK.

    The ability to strike our own deals - and they need not be comprehensive FTAs - means that we can negotiate with China (or any other country) on the basis of specific areas that are good for us and for them.

    Yebbut the thing that is sometimes easy to forget, is that we have an optimised for us trade deal in the bag for nearly half our exports. That is the idiocy of trying to jettison that one and create new ones with other countries (including, of course, the EU). It is truly baby and bathwater territory.
    Except of course it is not optimised for us. If it were we not have a massive and growing trade deficit with the rest of the EU which more than wipes our our trade surplus with the rest of the world.
    Deficits or surpluses with particular countries or groups of countries, or in certain product areas, are to be expected in any circumstances. It is the overall current account balance that matters - and that is corrected by movements in the exchange rate.
  • DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,215

    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
    I agree with what a few people have suggested, Labour will have done some private polling and decided that they can defeat the government on this without taking any pain.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    chrisoxon said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    alex. said:

    What is the difference between "THE" Customs Union and "A" customs union?

    We get to enjoy the May regime for a bit longer with the second one.
    "THE" CU is linked in with the rest of the EU deal and implies regulatory identity (not convergence or non-divergence or equivalence). "A" CU merely means agreement on common tariffs to third parties, plus anything else the participants decide to include. The big plus is that it makes UK-EU trade, specifically in Ireland, very much easier. The big minus is that you can't then run off and agree different tariffs with anyone else, ever.
    It doesn't make UK-EU trade very much easier because you still have NTBs to contend with. These could be eliminated by remaining in the single market or other agreement - a customs union alone does not facilitate the free movement of goods.

    If we do go down this route of a customs union then we might as well remain in the single market - why would you diverge if you can't use that to your advantage internationally?

    At this point we'd be doing a lot of work to in effect recreate the EU from outside its
    formal structures. What is the point? We might as well stay in. I say this as someone who spent countless hours campaigning to leave.
    A customs union will not eliminate all barriers, but the certainty that no duties will be payable makes a big difference to the sustainability of cross-border supply chains.

    Staying in the Single Market is only a minor step, which you seem to imply above, if you don’t care about freedom of movement from the EU. If so, you are in a very small minority of Leavers.

  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
    IIRC, there was a Tory abstainer as well - can't remember who.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,749
    DanSmith said:

    Is the government still going with the three baskets approach?

    AIUI, their 'have cake and eat it' policy is changing from Battenberg to Victoria Sponge.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited February 2018
    geoffw said:

    TOPPING said:



    No of course not. It might increase our trade deficit if we went for a bad deal. But the important point is that currently if we want to do any sort of deal with another country it has to be via the EU who are looking to do comprehensive trade deals which satisfy as much of the divergent needs of the 28 member states as possible. This inevitably means that such a deal will not be optimised for the UK.

    The ability to strike our own deals - and they need not be comprehensive FTAs - means that we can negotiate with China (or any other country) on the basis of specific areas that are good for us and for them.

    Yebbut the thing that is sometimes easy to forget, is that we have an optimised for us trade deal in the bag for nearly half our exports. That is the idiocy of trying to jettison that one and create new ones with other countries (including, of course, the EU). It is truly baby and bathwater territory.
    Except of course it is not optimised for us. If it were we not have a massive and growing trade deficit with the rest of the EU which more than wipes our our trade surplus with the rest of the world.
    Deficits or surpluses with particular countries or groups of countries, or in certain product areas, are to be expected in any circumstances. It is the overall current account balance that matters - and that is corrected by movements in the exchange rate.
    In a globalised world, not everyone is going to have a trade surplus. It should ebb and flow though as a systemic deficit or surplus is probably not good.

    However this has nowt to do with the EU.

    On one hand, we love consuming too much, and the things we wish to consume tend to come from Europe.

    On the other, we decimated our industrial base on the altar of the free market. So we don’t really make much (goods) the rest of the world wants, either.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,764

    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
    And assuming that all Labour MP's back the amendment.
  • Speaking at an event on Thursday, McDonnell said Labour was “not supporting membership of ‘the’ customs union, but we are looking at ‘a’ customs union”.

    “The reason we’re saying ‘a’ customs union is because we don’t want the same asymmetric relationship that Turkey have got,” he said.

    The only way to avoid an asymmetric relationship is to remain in the EU.
    Socialism, hypnotism, patriotism, materialism
    Fools making laws for the breaking of jaws

    Asymmetricalism too.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    edited February 2018
    sarissa said:

    DanSmith said:

    Is the government still going with the three baskets approach?

    AIUI, their 'have cake and eat it' policy is changing from Battenberg to Victoria Sponge.
    More like Turkish delight perhaps - or revani (Turkish semolina cake) which sounds like remaini.

    Being in the EU customs union or being in a theoretical customs union with the EU? Do most MPs know the difference let alone most voters or what the latter means in practice as it would have to be negotiated.
  • RoyalBlue said:

    chrisoxon said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    alex. said:

    What is the difference between "THE" Customs Union and "A" customs union?

    We get to enjoy the May regime for a bit longer with the second one.
    "THE" CU is linked in with the rest of the EU deal and implies regulatory identity (not convergence or non-divergence or equivalence). "A" CU merely means agreement on common tariffs to third parties, plus anything else the participants decide to include. The big plus is that it makes UK-EU trade, specifically in Ireland, very much easier. The big minus is that you can't then run off and agree different tariffs with anyone else, ever.
    It doesn't make UK-EU trade very much easier because you still have NTBs to contend with. These could be eliminated by remaining in the single market or other agreement - a customs union alone does not facilitate the free movement of goods.

    If we do go down this route of a customs union then we might as well remain in the single market - why would you diverge if you can't use that to your advantage internationally?

    At this point we'd be doing a lot of work to in effect recreate the EU from outside its
    formal structures. What is the point? We might as well stay in. I say this as someone who spent countless hours campaigning to leave.
    A customs union will not eliminate all barriers, but the certainty that no duties will be payable makes a big difference to the sustainability of cross-border supply chains.

    Staying in the Single Market is only a minor step, which you seem to imply above, if you don’t care about freedom of movement from the EU. If so, you are in a very small minority of Leavers.

    Using a customs union to eliminate duties is using a sledge hammer to crack a nut.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    rkrkrk said:

    I still think it is more likely the ERG brings down Mrs May/The Government than the likes of Soubry and Clarke.

    If she lost a vote on the customs union thing - would she have to go?
    And would a new leader have to call a GE?
    Yes and no.

    The FTPA complicates things.

    The government would have to lose an explicit vote of no confidence and Corbyn would have 14 days to try and form a government.
    I don't see anything in the FTPA that means Corbyn would get a chance to form a government.

    Before the FTPA the PM did not automatically resign following loss of a confidence vote. The PM usually called an election and remained as PM until after the election (see, for example, Callaghan in 1979). They only resigned if they lost the election. Nothing in the FTPA changes that. There is no requirement for the PM to resign after losing a confidence vote. So my view is that, if May loses a confidence vote, she has 14 days to turn it around. If she cannot do so there is an election. Corbyn only gets a chance to form a government if he wins that election.
    Under the FTPA, Parliament’s fixed five-year term can only be truncated in two ways. First, if more than two thirds of the House of Commons vote to call an election – and that means 434 of the 650 MPs, not just two thirds of those in the chamber.

    The second is more complicated. If a motion of no confidence is passed or there is a failed vote of confidence, there is a 14-day period in which to pass an act of confidence in a new government. If no such vote is passed, a new election must be held, probably a mere 17 working days later.

    So it gives Corbyn the opportunity to try and form a government in those 14 days.

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/not-so-fixed-term-parliaments-act
    There is nothing that says May can’t carry on trying at the same time
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    You whittle down the options by a long process to a form of leaving that means staying, and hey presto, you have unity.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    So, we have to wait a week for May to shamble to the podium and say...what?

    I don't wish to be unkind, but her lack of pace and inability to even pretend to be human is really irritating.
  • DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,215
    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    The arguments about the EU will carry on and on and on for decades, it won't end in 2019 or at the end of the transition.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870
    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
    And assuming that all Labour MP's back the amendment.
    The figure of 7 Tory rebels needed (unless I've misread Mr Mortimer) assumes that Hoey and Field vote against the amendment, and all other Labour MPs vote for it. That seems the most plausible outcome given previous voting records.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited February 2018
    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    Nope.

    It has retoxified the Conservative Party. There are many Conservative MPs who are not now or never were toxic and hence were drawn to a non-toxic Party. In that sense, in a re-toxified Party, those non-toxic MPs are part of a different party to the toxic/Kipperites.
  • Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
    That is relying upon all Labour MPs except Field and Hoey backing the party. Are you so sure for example that Kelvin Hopkins - who was a leading Brexit campaigner and is currently suspended from the Labour party - will choose to support Corbyn over this?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,764

    Sean_F said:

    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
    And assuming that all Labour MP's back the amendment.
    The figure of 7 Tory rebels needed (unless I've misread Mr Mortimer) assumes that Hoey and Field vote against the amendment, and all other Labour MPs vote for it. That seems the most plausible outcome given previous voting records.
    On those numbers, I think the government has a majority of 4.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Well, that is my Brexit prediction proved wrong.

    I thought that the aviation excrement would hit the air conditioning in March....

    twitter.com/iandunt/status/966964336261464065

  • Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,749
    OT - in Selkirkshire by-election, coalition of Anybody but Ruth Davidson's Candidate elected the popular local independent first-time candidate Caroline Penman.

    It took until the seventh transfer of votes to reach a decision.

    SCon took 43.5% of the vote in May 2017.
  • Vulnerable women are most likely being "extensively" abused across the UK and ministers need to urgently review sex exploitation laws, a report says.

    David Spicer led a review in the wake of Operation Sanctuary which saw 18 people jailed for the sexual abuse of young women groomed in Newcastle.

    The operation identified about 700 victims in total across the Northumbria Police area, 108 in Newcastle.

    In the Newcastle case, most of the men were British-born but all came from Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian, Iraqi, Iranian or Turkish communities.

    Think tank the Quillam Foundation, which focuses on counter-extremism, said 84% of the 264 offenders convicted of grooming between 2005 and 2017 were of south Asian heritage.

    Mr Spicer said the perpetrator he spoke to "displayed no regret" and "spoke in a derogatory manner about a lack of morals in British girls".

    He also said the government needs to research the "profiles, motivations and cultural and background influences of perpetrators of sexual exploitation".

    Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-43153556
  • Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    GIN1138 said:



    The numbers are looking very tight for May. Wonder if she's still pursuing the policy of "oh, we might lose, let's not bring it to a vote"?

    If they think they will lose.. Almost certainly.
    I suspect they'll win a vote, but only by one or two votes.

    Remember how slim the Govt defeat was on the only amendment to the Brexit bill that passed the commons: 309 to 305. That was with 11 Tory Mps rebelling. That was with Hoey and Field voting with the Govt, which I suspect they'd do again.

    Provided no more than 7 rebel, we'll squeak it.
    Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan, Sarah Wollaston, Jonathan Djanogly, and Stephen Hammond have signed the amendment.

    Dominic Grieve has said he'll vote for it. Ken Clarke is nailed on.

    That's seven rebels already. Only one more - Antoinette Sandbach, for example - and the vote is lost. (If Labour formally backs it, that is, which isn't guaranteed.)
    IIRC, there was a Tory abstainer as well - can't remember who.
    I'd add Justine Greening to the "at risk" list now, as well. Although she won't be quite as bitter as Nicky Morgan.

    Probably Heidi Allen is another.
  • What will the Scottish cohort of Remainy Conservative MPs do about this "A customs union" amendment? Has anyone interviewed Ruth Davidson yet?

    They're taking their lead from their elusive leader whose relationship with difficult questions is very much that of the mechanical hare with greyhounds. This is what she looks like when the mechanism breaks down.

    https://twitter.com/GAPonsonby/status/966388014955028480

    This is the 'full' statement.

    https://youtu.be/wfMhuwnAUZ8
  • Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    I can't agree with that. Removing the whip is fine but my belief is that all votes should be free votes so I am hardly going to agree with punishing MPs by deselection. That should be a matter entirely for their local constituencies. Even in cases where I disagree with the MPs concerned there is a fundamental principle involved.
  • Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    Just for clarification, is this the policy in the 2015 manifesto, the policy in the 2017 manifesto, the policy from last November, the policy from last December, the policy from last week, the policy from this week or tomorrow's policy?
  • TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    Nope.

    It has retoxified the Conservative Party. There are many Conservative MPs who are not now or never were toxic and hence were drawn to a non-toxic Party. In that sense, in a re-toxified Party, those non-toxic MPs are part of a different party to the toxic/Kipperites.
    The idea that Brexit is toxic to any but a tiny minority like yourself is just ludicrous.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,122
    OT - It is of course possible for the government to lose the Soubry amendment vote. However, they'd then win on a vote of no confidence as all of the Tory rebels would then back the government. So I don't see how it brings the government down.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Vulnerable women are most likely being "extensively" abused across the UK and ministers need to urgently review sex exploitation laws, a report says.

    David Spicer led a review in the wake of Operation Sanctuary which saw 18 people jailed for the sexual abuse of young women groomed in Newcastle.

    The operation identified about 700 victims in total across the Northumbria Police area, 108 in Newcastle.

    In the Newcastle case, most of the men were British-born but all came from Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian, Iraqi, Iranian or Turkish communities.

    Think tank the Quillam Foundation, which focuses on counter-extremism, said 84% of the 264 offenders convicted of grooming between 2005 and 2017 were of south Asian heritage.

    Mr Spicer said the perpetrator he spoke to "displayed no regret" and "spoke in a derogatory manner about a lack of morals in British girls".

    He also said the government needs to research the "profiles, motivations and cultural and background influences of perpetrators of sexual exploitation".

    Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-43153556

    That’s quite a report, obviously didn’t go through the usual political correctness filter before it was published.
  • What will the Scottish cohort of Remainy Conservative MPs do about this "A customs union" amendment? Has anyone interviewed Ruth Davidson yet?

    They're taking their lead from their elusive leader whose relationship with difficult questions is very much that of the mechanical hare with greyhounds. This is what she looks like when the mechanism breaks down.

    https://twitter.com/GAPonsonby/status/966388014955028480

    This is the 'full' statement.

    https://youtu.be/wfMhuwnAUZ8
    Paul Masterton, one of the Telegraph's Mutineers, is tweeting but not about this. It looks like they're keeping their powder dry for now.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    Nope.

    It has retoxified the Conservative Party. There are many Conservative MPs who are not now or never were toxic and hence were drawn to a non-toxic Party. In that sense, in a re-toxified Party, those non-toxic MPs are part of a different party to the toxic/Kipperites.
    The idea that Brexit is toxic to any but a tiny minority like yourself is just ludicrous.
    The bubble world of political betting.
  • Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    I can't agree with that. Removing the whip is fine but my belief is that all votes should be free votes so I am hardly going to agree with punishing MPs by deselection. That should be a matter entirely for their local constituencies. Even in cases where I disagree with the MPs concerned there is a fundamental principle involved.
    This is fundamental to the UK Government's negotiating strategy and has been painstakingly decided by a balanced Brexit sub-committee (and ultimately by the Cabinet) that represents all strands of party opinion.

    Conservative MPs who take advantage of a hung parliament to conspire with the Opposition to overthrow it regardless, and bind the Government's hands, are guilty of betrayal and have no place in the Party.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    On the party being split, there are more of us then there are of them. Eventually the last EUphiles will be removed from the party and there will be no split. The last EUsceptic split was 93 MPs the last EUphile split was 12 MPs.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    Nope.

    It has retoxified the Conservative Party. There are many Conservative MPs who are not now or never were toxic and hence were drawn to a non-toxic Party. In that sense, in a re-toxified Party, those non-toxic MPs are part of a different party to the toxic/Kipperites.
    The idea that Brexit is toxic to any but a tiny minority like yourself is just ludicrous.
    When you have John Redwood, Bill Cash, JRM et al at the forefront of policy decision-making then you have a toxic party.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    For every policy ?
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    Nope.

    It has retoxified the Conservative Party. There are many Conservative MPs who are not now or never were toxic and hence were drawn to a non-toxic Party. In that sense, in a re-toxified Party, those non-toxic MPs are part of a different party to the toxic/Kipperites.
    The idea that Brexit is toxic to any but a tiny minority like yourself is just ludicrous.
    The bubble world of political betting.
    Hey, we're keeping it real on the mean streets of the Internet. We are the everypersons of this great Kingdom. Totally street.

    Sadly, I have no idea what real people are thinking; no one of my acquaintance or my family members ever talk about it, or evinces any desire to do so if I raise the subject. My beloved will occasionally tolerate me musing on the topic, but not for long.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,880
    MaxPB said:

    On the party being split, there are more of us then there are of them. Eventually the last EUphiles will be removed from the party and there will be no split. The last EUsceptic split was 93 MPs the last EUphile split was 12 MPs.

    Didn’t most Tory MPs back Remain?
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    ...
    Think tank the Quillam Foundation, which focuses on counter-extremism, said 84% of the 264 offenders convicted of grooming between 2005 and 2017 were of south Asian heritage.

    Mr Spicer said the perpetrator he spoke to "displayed no regret" and "spoke in a derogatory manner about a lack of morals in British girls".

    Odd that they have no problem with their own morals - being molesters, rapists, abusers, etc.

    Other peoples's morals are obviously more important ...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    Just for clarification, is this the policy in the 2015 manifesto, the policy in the 2017 manifesto, the policy from last November, the policy from last December, the policy from last week, the policy from this week or tomorrow's policy?
    2017 Manifesto:

    As we leave the EU, we will no longer be members of the single market or customs union but we will seek a deep and special partnership including a comprehensive free trade and customs agreement.

    So we'll be leaving THE customs union. Agreement/union (with the preceeding indefinite article) looks to be the point of the pinhead...
    However do we have time to arrange "a" customs union with the EU before March next year ?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    Nope.

    It has retoxified the Conservative Party. There are many Conservative MPs who are not now or never were toxic and hence were drawn to a non-toxic Party. In that sense, in a re-toxified Party, those non-toxic MPs are part of a different party to the toxic/Kipperites.
    The idea that Brexit is toxic to any but a tiny minority like yourself is just ludicrous.
    When you have John Redwood, Bill Cash, JRM et al at the forefront of policy decision-making then you have a toxic party.
    It's balanced by having Anna Soubry saying "sling 'em out". In a way Brexit has just brought the whole country into the battle for the soul of the Conservative party.
  • Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    rkrkrk said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the party being split, there are more of us then there are of them. Eventually the last EUphiles will be removed from the party and there will be no split. The last EUsceptic split was 93 MPs the last EUphile split was 12 MPs.

    Didn’t most Tory MPs back Remain?
    Max is confusing rebels with Remainers. Plenty of the latter have never and never will rebel. Which is of course not to say that they are not biding their time for events.
  • Will the DUP MPs vote for or against a customs union?

    Do they support the government or do they think a customs union would help prevent a border being set up between Northern Ireland and the UK mainland?
  • rkrkrk said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the party being split, there are more of us then there are of them. Eventually the last EUphiles will be removed from the party and there will be no split. The last EUsceptic split was 93 MPs the last EUphile split was 12 MPs.

    Didn’t most Tory MPs back Remain?
    They backed their party leader. A very different thing.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841

    Will the DUP MPs vote for or against a customs union?

    Do they support the government or do they think a customs union would help prevent a border being set up between Northern Ireland and the UK mainland?

    The Honourable Ian Paisley Jr previous statement was No surrender to Brussels I believe. The Gov't will be able to count on their support.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    FF43 said:

    I assume the government would do a deal with their soft Brexit rebels* and water down their regulatory and customs proposals, or most likely push it out until next year when the second cliff edge will have its effect.

    * noteworthy that you have to specify which group of Tory rebels you are referring to.

    I remember being told prior to the referendum that only a Leave victory would unite the Tory party.
    It has.

    The arguments are about the form of leaving now - that heals quicker than a yes/no discussion
    Nope.

    It has retoxified the Conservative Party. There are many Conservative MPs who are not now or never were toxic and hence were drawn to a non-toxic Party. In that sense, in a re-toxified Party, those non-toxic MPs are part of a different party to the toxic/Kipperites.
    The idea that Brexit is toxic to any but a tiny minority like yourself is just ludicrous.
    When you have John Redwood, Bill Cash, JRM et al at the forefront of policy decision-making then you have a toxic party.
    It's balanced by having Anna Soubry saying "sling 'em out". In a way Brexit has just brought the whole country into the battle for the soul of the Conservative party.
    It was a majority of Conservative voters voting Leave against the advice of the then party leader which was pivotal to the Leave victory.

    If only a majority of UKIP voters had voted Leave then Remain would have won comfortably
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Not much love here for these brave Tory MPs
  • Jonathan said:

    Not much love here for these brave Tory MPs

    They are true patriots.

    I love a sovereign Parliament in action.
  • Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Doesn't that also mean that Churchill would never have been PM?
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
  • Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Doesn't that also mean that Churchill would never have been PM?
    Churchill was a dirty double rat.

    You can’t trust rats.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    chrisoxon said:



    It doesn't make UK-EU trade very much easier because you still have NTBs to contend with. These could be eliminated by remaining in the single market or other agreement - a customs union alone does not facilitate the free movement of goods.

    If we do go down this route of a customs union then we might as well remain in the single market - why would you diverge if you can't use that to your advantage internationally?

    At this point we'd be doing a lot of work to in effect recreate the EU from outside its
    formal structures. What is the point? We might as well stay in. I say this as someone who spent countless hours campaigning to leave.

    Yes, I broadly agree. It would be a compromise between Leavers and Remainers, formally leaving (giving a potential to move away in time) while remaining in reality inside in most respects for now. It would kick down the road the question of whether and how far we would actually want to be really divergent.

    I'd suggest that this is May's normally modus operandi - split differences, seek a fudge, postpone hard choices - but also that it's perhaps close to what most people want: don't actually reverse the referendum, but don't do anything drastic for now. It is also close to the Parliamentary arithmetic.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Jonathan said:

    Not much love here for these brave Tory MPs

    They are true patriots.

    I love a sovereign Parliament in action.
    We really need the LIKE button back :D
  • Elliot said:

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
    They voted against their own government’s Queen Speech.

    So much worse.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    ...
    Think tank the Quillam Foundation, which focuses on counter-extremism, said 84% of the 264 offenders convicted of grooming between 2005 and 2017 were of south Asian heritage.

    Mr Spicer said the perpetrator he spoke to "displayed no regret" and "spoke in a derogatory manner about a lack of morals in British girls".

    Odd that they have no problem with their own morals - being molesters, rapists, abusers, etc.

    Other peoples's morals are obviously more important ...
    What they mean by "lack of morals" is "not Muslim". I grew up in the Muslim community. While most Muslims are decent, kind-hearted people, there is an Islam nationalistic subset that regards non-Muslim girls as "kuffar scum". They do not dress modestly, showing their arms, legs, hair etc so deserve what they get. Often they will justify it by referring to how non-Muslim women were treated as sex slaves under the Rashidun Caliphs.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    There's certainly a moral case for Mr Corbyn to try to form a government in the case of TMay losing a vote of no confidence.Should he be able to secure a working arrangement of some sort with the LDs,SNP and Greens,he would represent 52% of those who voted in GE2017,a good basis for the validation of a minority government.Some might say it's "the Will of The People".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results
  • What will the Scottish cohort of Remainy Conservative MPs do about this "A customs union" amendment? Has anyone interviewed Ruth Davidson yet?

    They're taking their lead from their elusive leader whose relationship with difficult questions is very much that of the mechanical hare with greyhounds. This is what she looks like when the mechanism breaks down.

    https://twitter.com/GAPonsonby/status/966388014955028480

    This is the 'full' statement.

    https://youtu.be/wfMhuwnAUZ8
    Paul Masterton, one of the Telegraph's Mutineers, is tweeting but not about this. It looks like they're keeping their powder dry for now.
    Four MPs out of the SCon cohort have either supported or signed the ERG 'No to vassalage, yes to buccaneering' letter which seems quite a high proportion, particularly since they're from constituencies that had strongish remain votes.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Amazing how much of this could have been avoided if Cameron's referendum had just been more specific about what we were voting for.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    It's interesting how many people have suddenly started saying they're bored/exhausted/fed up with Brexit. A definite change in mood in the last few days.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    Elliot said:

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
    They voted against their own government’s Queen Speech.

    So much worse.
    I'm not sure. I think this negotiation is more important than any single year's legislative agenda.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    There's certainly a moral case for Mr Corbyn to try to form a government in the case of TMay losing a vote of no confidence.Should he be able to secure a working arrangement of some sort with the LDs,SNP and Greens,he would represent 52% of those who voted in GE2017,a good basis for the validation of a minority government.Some might say it's "the Will of The People".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results

    True, though I expect the new Tory Leader of the Opposition would relish fighting a Corbyn minority government propped up by the SNP, LDs and Greens at the next general election
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    ...It would kick down the road the question of whether and how far we would actually want to be really divergent.

    I'd suggest that this is May's normally modus operandi

    All very well Nick, except this particular road has brick wall across it in March 2019. Cans kicked hard enough simply bounce off that wall
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    ...It would kick down the road the question of whether and how far we would actually want to be really divergent.

    I'd suggest that this is May's normally modus operandi

    All very well Nick, except this particular road has brick wall across it in March 2019. Cans kicked hard enough simply bounce off that wall
    Suspect this is why arch-Brexiters are really so concerned about the transition period. It's essentially a tunnel through that wall for certain issues, into the vast open steppes of vague timescales and potential fudges.
  • Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
    They voted against their own government’s Queen Speech.

    So much worse.
    I'm not sure. I think this negotiation is more important than any single year's legislative agenda.
    Your rebels: good. Hostile rebels: bad. The line of thought is simple enough, I grant you.
  • Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
    They voted against their own government’s Queen Speech.

    So much worse.
    I'm not sure. I think this negotiation is more important than any single year's legislative agenda.
    Ok.

    So following on with your premise, why do you hate a sovereign Parliament ?

    I was assured that’s what the referendum was about and nowt to do with immigration.
  • Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    I still think it is more likely the ERG brings down Mrs May/The Government than the likes of Soubry and Clarke.

    If she lost a vote on the customs union thing - would she have to go?
    And would a new leader have to call a GE?
    Yes and no.

    The FTPA complicates things.

    The government would have to lose an explicit vote of no confidence and Corbyn would have 14 days to try and form a government.
    I don't see anything in the FTPA that means Corbyn would get a chance to form a government.

    Before the FTPA the PM did not automatically resign following loss of a confidence vote. The PM usually called an election and remained as PM until after the election (see, for example, Callaghan in 1979). They only resigned if they lost the election. Nothing in the FTPA changes that. There is no requirement for the PM to resign after losing a confidence vote. So my view is that, if May loses a confidence vote, she has 14 days to turn it around. If she cannot do so there is an election. Corbyn only gets a chance to form a government if he wins that election.
    Under the FTPA, Parliament’s fixed five-year term can only be truncated in two ways. First, if more than two thirds of the House of Commons vote to call an election – and that means 434 of the 650 MPs, not just two thirds of those in the chamber.

    The second is more complicated. If a motion of no confidence is passed or there is a failed vote of confidence, there is a 14-day period in which to pass an act of confidence in a new government. If no such vote is passed, a new election must be held, probably a mere 17 working days later.

    So it gives Corbyn the opportunity to try and form a government in those 14 days.

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/not-so-fixed-term-parliaments-act
    There is nothing that says May can’t carry on trying at the same time
    Indeed. And May would remain PM whilst she did so. Unless she resigns, Corbyn cannot become PM. Even if Corbyn managed to put a coalition together, May can simply sit tight and force a general election. Unless you think the Queen would force May to resign in this situation.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,880

    rkrkrk said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the party being split, there are more of us then there are of them. Eventually the last EUphiles will be removed from the party and there will be no split. The last EUsceptic split was 93 MPs the last EUphile split was 12 MPs.

    Didn’t most Tory MPs back Remain?
    They backed their party leader. A very different thing.
    You'd like to think that on an issue like Brexit they might have voted their conscience rather than their career.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    edited February 2018

    The line of thought is simple enough, I grant you.

    I saw a theory recently that some of the motivation for the Leave was a rejection of complexity.

    Life was simpler when everybody you met spoke English (only)

    Life was simpler when our passports were Blue.

    It would be simpler to use the NHS if the waiting rooms were empty.

    A Free trade deal with the EU will be the simplest in history. We can get it done in an afternoon.

    If that is true, it begs the question what happens when Brexit increases the complexity of life in almost every area.
  • Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
    They voted against their own government’s Queen Speech.

    So much worse.
    I'm not sure. I think this negotiation is more important than any single year's legislative agenda.
    Ok.

    So following on with your premise, why do you hate a sovereign Parliament ?

    I was assured that’s what the referendum was about and nowt to do with immigration.
    Who elects Parliament?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841

    It's interesting how many people have suddenly started saying they're bored/exhausted/fed up with Brexit. A definite change in mood in the last few days.

    Who ?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Scott_P said:

    The line of thought is simple enough, I grant you.

    I saw a theory recently that some of the motivation for the Leave was a rejection of complexity.

    Life was simpler when everybody you met spoke English (only)

    Life was simpler when our passports were Blue.

    It would be simpler to see the NHS if the waiting rooms were empty.

    A Free trade deal with the EU will be the simplest in history. We can get it done in an afternoon.

    If that is true, it begs the question what happens when Brexit increases the complexity of life in almost every area.
    I think this also partially explains the Anglosphere envy. People look at countries like Australia and New Zealand through a romanticised lens and assume life is so much simpler there, and they don't have some European commissioner regulating their bananas.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    TOPPING said:

    rkrkrk said:

    MaxPB said:

    On the party being split, there are more of us then there are of them. Eventually the last EUphiles will be removed from the party and there will be no split. The last EUsceptic split was 93 MPs the last EUphile split was 12 MPs.

    Didn’t most Tory MPs back Remain?
    Max is confusing rebels with Remainers. Plenty of the latter have never and never will rebel. Which is of course not to say that they are not biding their time for events.
    I'm not confusing anything, there are Tory MPs who have voted for Brexit and Tory MPs who have voted against. Last time there were 12 of your lot. Not exactly the earth shattering figure that is being presented.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841
    HYUFD said:

    There's certainly a moral case for Mr Corbyn to try to form a government in the case of TMay losing a vote of no confidence.Should he be able to secure a working arrangement of some sort with the LDs,SNP and Greens,he would represent 52% of those who voted in GE2017,a good basis for the validation of a minority government.Some might say it's "the Will of The People".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results

    True, though I expect the new Tory Leader of the Opposition would relish fighting a Corbyn minority government propped up by the SNP, LDs and Greens at the next general election
    There is a live test of more or less this scenario going on in New Zealand right now. I think Labour would head into a definite poll lead here if it happened, at the expense of Lib Dem and (In Scotland) SNP share.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/01/newshub-poll-labour-soars-to-popularity-not-seen-for-a-decade.html
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Pulpstar said:

    It's interesting how many people have suddenly started saying they're bored/exhausted/fed up with Brexit. A definite change in mood in the last few days.

    Who ?
    https://twitter.com/GeorgeTrefgarne/status/966971930631909376
    https://twitter.com/OliverNorgrove/status/966981945392541697
    https://twitter.com/WomaninHavana/status/966932484238794752
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503
    I think we have to calm down and reflect a bit. Parliament gotta parliament.

    I've said this before, forgive me for repeating this; as long as we keep following democratic processes, then in the long term, it doesn't really matter whether we're in or out of the EU. The health of our democracy is more important.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
    They voted against their own government’s Queen Speech.

    So much worse.
    I'm not sure. I think this negotiation is more important than any single year's legislative agenda.
    Ok.

    So following on with your premise, why do you hate a sovereign Parliament ?

    I was assured that’s what the referendum was about and nowt to do with immigration.
    To be fair, our own political processes- which can include things like deselection- are at least entirely under our control. So I don't think there's anything inconsistent about the "sovereignty" argument on that level. I don't think Leavers were every really interested in parliament vs. government sovereignty, no matter what the terminology they used was.

    For people who are really interested in fairly assessing the facts rather than just scoring points in political arguments, it's usually a good idea to imagine the sides reversed. So, Leavers, would you be happy with the whip being removed and MPs deselected if the PM and cabinet were going for an ultra-soft Brexit, and the rebels were trying to get a harder version? Close your eyes and try to really imagine that- picture the headlines, the speeches by a Remainer PM, the comment threads on sites like this. If you do that honestly and whole-heartedly, and you still come to the same conclusion, then good. And if you find you need to start shifting your argument ("oh, it's really more about not respecting the referendum than about betraying the government") then that's good too- you've discarded a bad argument and come up with a better one.
  • Pulpstar said:

    It's interesting how many people have suddenly started saying they're bored/exhausted/fed up with Brexit. A definite change in mood in the last few days.

    Who ?
    Me for starters.

    I’d like to go an entire week at work without having to think about Brexit.

    I know we’ve made plans for a WTO/No Deal Brexit but it still terrifies me from a professional vantage.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Scott_P said:

    The line of thought is simple enough, I grant you.

    I saw a theory recently that some of the motivation for the Leave was a rejection of complexity.

    Life was simpler when everybody you met spoke English (only)

    Life was simpler when our passports were Blue.

    It would be simpler to use the NHS if the waiting rooms were empty.

    A Free trade deal with the EU will be the simplest in history. We can get it done in an afternoon.

    If that is true, it begs the question what happens when Brexit increases the complexity of life in almost every area.
    The Leavers will blame everyone else for not doing Brexit the correct way. Presumably the deportations will start soon after... ;)
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    Pulpstar said:

    It's interesting how many people have suddenly started saying they're bored/exhausted/fed up with Brexit. A definite change in mood in the last few days.

    Who ?
    https://twitter.com/GeorgeTrefgarne/status/966971930631909376
    https://twitter.com/OliverNorgrove/status/966981945392541697
    https://twitter.com/WomaninHavana/status/966932484238794752
    Oh. Twitter people.
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    Elliot said:

    Elliot said:

    Any Conservative MP who votes against Government policy should immediately have the whip removed, and de-selected.

    If only Dave had done that between 2010 and 2016 then Mrs May wouldn’t have to deal with the ERG lot.
    Did any of them side with the opposition to legally tie his hands in his negotiation with the EU?
    They voted against their own government’s Queen Speech.

    So much worse.
    I'm not sure. I think this negotiation is more important than any single year's legislative agenda.
    Ok.

    So following on with your premise, why do you hate a sovereign Parliament ?

    I was assured that’s what the referendum was about and nowt to do with immigration.
    Who elects Parliament?

    The Russians?

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited February 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    There's certainly a moral case for Mr Corbyn to try to form a government in the case of TMay losing a vote of no confidence.Should he be able to secure a working arrangement of some sort with the LDs,SNP and Greens,he would represent 52% of those who voted in GE2017,a good basis for the validation of a minority government.Some might say it's "the Will of The People".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results

    True, though I expect the new Tory Leader of the Opposition would relish fighting a Corbyn minority government propped up by the SNP, LDs and Greens at the next general election
    There is a live test of more or less this scenario going on in New Zealand right now. I think Labour would head into a definite poll lead here if it happened, at the expense of Lib Dem and (In Scotland) SNP share.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/01/newshub-poll-labour-soars-to-popularity-not-seen-for-a-decade.html
    First that poll is barely a few months after the general election and second the Nationals are still in front on voteshare (and almost certainly seats on that poll) and third Ardern is not Corbyn, after all she once worked for Blair.

    A Corbyn government would likely be as unpopular as the administration of Francois Hollande within a few years and if Hollande had stood for re election and not Macron he would have lost to the UMP candidate by a landslide
  • Scott_P said:

    The line of thought is simple enough, I grant you.

    I saw a theory recently that some of the motivation for the Leave was a rejection of complexity.

    Life was simpler when everybody you met spoke English (only)

    Life was simpler when our passports were Blue.

    It would be simpler to use the NHS if the waiting rooms were empty.

    A Free trade deal with the EU will be the simplest in history. We can get it done in an afternoon.

    If that is true, it begs the question what happens when Brexit increases the complexity of life in almost every area.
    The Leavers will blame everyone else for not doing Brexit the correct way. Presumably the deportations will start soon after... ;)
    Don’t worry, David Davis and Liam Fox will be in charge of the deportations.

    Those two cock juggling thunder twats are so incompetent they’ll end up deporting Leavers and importing loads of EU citizens.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Scott_P said:

    The line of thought is simple enough, I grant you.

    I saw a theory recently that some of the motivation for the Leave was a rejection of complexity.

    Life was simpler when everybody you met spoke English (only)

    Life was simpler when our passports were Blue.

    It would be simpler to use the NHS if the waiting rooms were empty.

    A Free trade deal with the EU will be the simplest in history. We can get it done in an afternoon.

    If that is true, it begs the question what happens when Brexit increases the complexity of life in almost every area.
    The Leavers will blame everyone else for not doing Brexit the correct way. Presumably the deportations will start soon after... ;)
    Don’t worry, David Davis and Liam Fox will be in charge of the deportations.

    Those two cock juggling thunder twats are so incompetent they’ll end up deporting Leavers and importing loads of EU citizens.
    :D:D:D
This discussion has been closed.