Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why I won’t be surprised to see a general election or Corbyn b

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited February 25 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why I won’t be surprised to see a general election or Corbyn become Prime Minister this year

Theresa May’s facing her political Kobayashi Maru scenario. https://t.co/lFFPp5NakY pic.twitter.com/kVfQ9IWAwt

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Good article, it's hard to see how she square's the circle with a tiny majority and two fundamentally divergent wings of her party.

    If only she hadn't flung away a stable majority
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,252

    Good article, it's hard to see how she square's the circle with a tiny majority and two fundamentally divergent wings of her party.

    If only she hadn't flung away a stable majority

    If only the PM had used the election she claimed to have called to win a mandate for her vision of Brexit to say what on earth that was. It might have bound the so-called rebels to support or oppose the customs union or any possible alternative customs union.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,663
    The Kobayashi Maru scenario was beaten by JTK. But Mrs. May is no Jim Kirk.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149
    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,663
    edited February 25
    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    It's difficult to fault the logic of this but I feel we're no longer living in Paine's "Age of Reason". Contemporary British politics is now more like a blend of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and The Road.

    The Shinners taking their seats would be an epochal event so I hope it happens just for the entertainment value.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,054
    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    Corbyn would be a fool to become PM in the present parliament. He would have no power to do anything, would not be able to call an election and would face the possibility that the Tories could bring him down at any moment of their chosing in the next four years.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149
    edited February 25
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    It's difficult to fault the logic of this but I feel we're no longer living in Paine's "Age of Reason". Contemporary British politics is now more like a blend of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and The Road.

    The Shinners taking their seats would be an epochal event so I hope it happens just for the entertainment value.
    I'll bet all day against the Shinners taking their seats. They are never going to affirm an oath promising to serve the Queen in a month of Sundays.

    It's as unlikely as Scotland beating England in the Six Nations...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    It's difficult to fault the logic of this but I feel we're no longer living in Paine's "Age of Reason". Contemporary British politics is now more like a blend of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and The Road.

    The Shinners taking their seats would be an epochal event so I hope it happens just for the entertainment value.
    I'll bet all day against the Shinners taking their seats. They are never going to affirm an oath promising to serve the Queen in a month of Sundays.

    It's as unlikely as Scotland beating England in the Six Nations...
    Off-topic:

    Mr Pit, with all the controversy over halo coming into F1, I saw the following on a lot simpler medical aid in F1:
    https://www.fia.com/news/safety-their-hands

    It seems a brilliant idea. I know other companies developing patches that transmit biometrics, and it's massively costly to develop, so it'd be interesting to know exactly how their tech works.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,663
    Sandpit said:


    I'll bet all day against the Shinners taking their seats. They are never going to affirm an oath promising to serve the Queen in a month of Sundays.

    They abandoned 80 odd years of refusing to take their seats in the Dail Eirann when it suited them...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    edited February 25
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    I'll bet all day against the Shinners taking their seats. They are never going to affirm an oath promising to serve the Queen in a month of Sundays.

    They abandoned 80 odd years of refusing to take their seats in the Dail Eirann when it suited them...
    Tentatively dipping my toes into NI politics, where I rarely tread:

    There may be a couple of other factors: firstly, McElduff has resigned his seat after his sick Kingsmill stunt, so currently there are six Sinn Fein MPs. But that's a minor point, and one that will probably disappear in a by-election.

    The bigger point is the ages of those MPs: Gildernew was born in 1970, McCallion in 1982 and Hazzard in 1984. The latter two have spent more of their lives post-the Good Friday Agreement than before it.

    Molloy, Maskey and Brady are older and, without knowing their characters, might well be of an older mindset. However none of them have been an MP for more than seven years.

    The old guard might never do it. However the younger generation, raised mostly in the curious peace there is over there, might take a very different view. Therefore it'll be interesting to see who Sinn Fein put forward to replace McElduff: a youngster or an old hand?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149
    edited February 25

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    It's difficult to fault the logic of this but I feel we're no longer living in Paine's "Age of Reason". Contemporary British politics is now more like a blend of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and The Road.

    The Shinners taking their seats would be an epochal event so I hope it happens just for the entertainment value.
    I'll bet all day against the Shinners taking their seats. They are never going to affirm an oath promising to serve the Queen in a month of Sundays.

    It's as unlikely as Scotland beating England in the Six Nations...
    Off-topic:

    Mr Pit, with all the controversy over halo coming into F1, I saw the following on a lot simpler medical aid in F1:
    https://www.fia.com/news/safety-their-hands

    It seems a brilliant idea. I know other companies developing patches that transmit biometrics, and it's massively costly to develop, so it'd be interesting to know exactly how their tech works.
    They've been testing this for a year or so, some of the teams put their research guys on it with the FIA medical team and this is what they came up with. They already have g-force sensors in their earphones so that the crash teams can get an accurate reading of the forces experienced by the head in an accident.

    This year they'll have this feeding back to the safety car, so the doctor can see the state of their patient before they even arrive at the scene. In a year or two they'll probably have the whole lot integrated into telemetry and we'll have the drivers' vital signs on the TV screens (but probably not when there's a crash, obviously).

    Awesome technology, and a lot of real-world applications for it in dangerous places such as divers and oil/gas rig workers, as well as in wider motorsport and other sports where serious injuries can happen to competitors.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    It's difficult to fault the logic of this but I feel we're no longer living in Paine's "Age of Reason". Contemporary British politics is now more like a blend of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and The Road.

    The Shinners taking their seats would be an epochal event so I hope it happens just for the entertainment value.
    I'll bet all day against the Shinners taking their seats. They are never going to affirm an oath promising to serve the Queen in a month of Sundays.

    It's as unlikely as Scotland beating England in the Six Nations...
    Off-topic:

    Mr Pit, with all the controversy over halo coming into F1, I saw the following on a lot simpler medical aid in F1:
    https://www.fia.com/news/safety-their-hands

    It seems a brilliant idea. I know other companies developing patches that transmit biometrics, and it's massively costly to develop, so it'd be interesting to know exactly how their tech works.
    They've been testing this for a year or so, some of the teams put their research guys on it with the FIA medical team and this is what they came up with. They already have g-force sensors in their earphones so that the crash teams can get an accurate reading of the forces experienced by the head in an accident.

    This year they'll have this feeding back to the safety car, so the doctor can see the state of their patient before they even arrive at the scene. In a year or two they'll probably have the whole lot integrated into telemetry and we'll have the drivers' vital signs on the TV screens (but probably not when there's a crash, obviously).

    Awesome technology, and a lot of real-world applications for it in dangerous places such as divers and oil/gas rig workers, as well as in wider motorsport and other sports where serious injuries can happen to competitors.
    Thanks for that. I knew about the G-sensors, but hadn't heard about this.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,349
    Sandpit said:

    I'll bet all day against the Shinners taking their seats. They are never going to affirm an oath promising to serve the Queen in a month of Sundays.

    It's as unlikely as Scotland beating England in the Six Nations...

    Titter .... :smile:

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,645
    PeterC said:

    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    Corbyn would be a fool to become PM in the present parliament. He would have no power to do anything, would not be able to call an election and would face the possibility that the Tories could bring him down at any moment of their chosing in the next four years.
    A month or two as PM before calling a GE might be viable.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,133
    I will be cheering if this govt falls. They have stopped serving the country and need to be reminded of what happens to parties that serve themselves rather than the country.

    Corbyn may be no better but that is not the point.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149
    edited February 25

    Sandpit said:



    Off-topic:

    Mr Pit, with all the controversy over halo coming into F1, I saw the following on a lot simpler medical aid in F1:
    https://www.fia.com/news/safety-their-hands

    It seems a brilliant idea. I know other companies developing patches that transmit biometrics, and it's massively costly to develop, so it'd be interesting to know exactly how their tech works.

    They've been testing this for a year or so, some of the teams put their research guys on it with the FIA medical team and this is what they came up with. They already have g-force sensors in their earphones so that the crash teams can get an accurate reading of the forces experienced by the head in an accident.

    This year they'll have this feeding back to the safety car, so the doctor can see the state of their patient before they even arrive at the scene. In a year or two they'll probably have the whole lot integrated into telemetry and we'll have the drivers' vital signs on the TV screens (but probably not when there's a crash, obviously).

    Awesome technology, and a lot of real-world applications for it in dangerous places such as divers and oil/gas rig workers, as well as in wider motorsport and other sports where serious injuries can happen to competitors.
    Thanks for that. I knew about the G-sensors, but hadn't heard about this.
    One of the things I love about F1 is the crossover of technology to other areas, and it isn't just to road cars either. There's a serious number of very good engineers involved in F1 (most of them based in the UK) and the teams often work across other industries to develop the technology.

    For example, the Mercedes team worked on developing a prosthetic arm and Williams Engineering have done a lot of work on energy storage technology using flywheels. There's obviously also a lot of crossover to road cars, with traction control systems, ABS and active suspensions that we now take for granted on our own cars becoming so good they got banned from racing. Another big one coming down the line is massively more efficient engines - an F1 car averages around 15mpg during a race, more than double what it did a decade ago. That's why they're not as noisy as they used to be, and also why the manufacturers have spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing them. McLaren are even building their own sports cars, and by all accounts are giving Ferrari a run for their money in only six or seven years.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:



    Off-topic:

    Mr Pit, with all the controversy over halo coming into F1, I saw the following on a lot simpler medical aid in F1:
    https://www.fia.com/news/safety-their-hands

    It seems a brilliant idea. I know other companies developing patches that transmit biometrics, and it's massively costly to develop, so it'd be interesting to know exactly how their tech works.

    They've been testing this for a year or so, some of the teams put their research guys on it with the FIA medical team and this is what they came up with. They already have g-force sensors in their earphones so that the crash teams can get an accurate reading of the forces experienced by the head in an accident.

    This year they'll have this feeding back to the safety car, so the doctor can see the state of their patient before they even arrive at the scene. In a year or two they'll probably have the whole lot integrated into telemetry and we'll have the drivers' vital signs on the TV screens (but probably not when there's a crash, obviously).

    Awesome technology, and a lot of real-world applications for it in dangerous places such as divers and oil/gas rig workers, as well as in wider motorsport and other sports where serious injuries can happen to competitors.
    Thanks for that. I knew about the G-sensors, but hadn't heard about this.
    One of the things I love about F1 is the crossover of technology to other areas, and it isn't just to road cars either. There's a serious number of very good engineers involved in F1 (most of them based in the UK) and the teams often work across other industries to develop the technology.

    For example, the Mercedes team worked on developing a prosthetic arm and Williams Engineering have done a lot of work on energy storage technology using flywheels. There's obviously also a lot of crossover to road cars, with traction control systems, ABS and active suspensions that we now take for granted on our own cars becoming so good they got banned from racing. Another big one coming down the line is massively more efficient engines - an F1 car averages around 15mpg during a race, more than double what it did a decade ago. That's why they're not as noisy as they used to be, and also why the manufacturers have spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing them. McLaren are even building their own sports cars, and by all accounts are giving Ferrari a run for their money in only six or seven years.
    +1 to all that.

    I know a couple of people working in F1 (or, in one case, a side-arm of an F1 team) and this is very true.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,799
    "some Tories may decide that managing Brexit is just too damaging for the Tories and they might abstain in a Parliamentary vote and make Corbyn PM."

    It's called governing. It requires taking tough decisions. If they can't take them, they shouldn't be MPs.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 583

    I will be cheering if this govt falls. They have stopped serving the country and need to be reminded of what happens to parties that serve themselves rather than the country.

    Corbyn may be no better but that is not the point.

    It is the dozen or so potential saboteurs on the Tory benches, led by a couple of MPs from Nottinghamshire, who are the real problem. There is no point in leaving the EU only to remain in the SM/CU, and subject to laws enacted in Brussels (and conceived in Berlin) but with no say in their creation.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,907
    If Corbyn does become PM without a majority he'll need the political skill of a Tallyrand or a Bismark to pull it off. Hard to believe he has it in him. But he has already surprised us with his achievements.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,409
    Why all the enthusiasm for the Customs Union. If it looks like remaining in the EU with no control over things, that's what it is.

    As for the rugby, Scotland deserved to win. I'm no fan of Chris Robshaw, he and Nathan Hughes are too alike, but you couldn't blame them for yesterday.

    There was a perfect example in the first half of what was wrong, a cameo in fact.
    Unfortunately, it was a still life not an action painting. Joe Launchberry was stood over the ball at a sparsely-attended ruck and glanced back at his team looking for inspiration.

    Joe, you're six foot six and you weigh 19 stone, you're not there to consider the ways of the world. You're not a philosopher or a poet. "What is this life if full of care, we have no tie to stand and stare." We know you're not a number nine, but you could do your primary duty - protect the ball. Instead a Scottish forward comes through and picks up the ball, and then, without a 'by your leave', he runs off for a turn-over.

    "I say, old chap, that's not cricket." No, but it is rugby.
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,054
    Foxy said:

    PeterC said:

    Sandpit said:

    I don't see how Corbyn becomes PM without an election. He doesn't have the numbers, there's no way the Conservatives or the DUP will vote for anything that makes him PM.

    As @TSE and others keep saying, the FTPA complicates things. There needs to be an explicit vote on a motion "This House has No Confidence in the Government" which not even Anna Soubry or Dominic Grieve are going to vote for if they wish to remain Conservative MPs.

    The more likely scenario is that, having failed to stop the motion about a customs union, the PM is removed by those opposed to a customs union and replaced with someone like Michael Gove to see the Brexit Bills through Parliament.

    Corbyn would be a fool to become PM in the present parliament. He would have no power to do anything, would not be able to call an election and would face the possibility that the Tories could bring him down at any moment of their chosing in the next four years.
    A month or two as PM before calling a GE might be viable.
    Viable for whom? Unless the FTPA is repealed the PM cannot 'call' an election. Parliament would not vote for one and if he contrived a 'no cofidence' vote power would pass back to the Tories, who would be able to form a government.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1 testing starts tomorrow. Huzzah!

    I couldn't watch the Six Nations yesterday due to a reception problem, but congratulations to Scotland. Did England not turn up, Scotland play well etc?

    For once, the prediction of the tournament being open has proved accurate.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,041
    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,245
    Good article .However can not see the government falling.The conservatives are always pragmatic , to remaining in power.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 583

    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.

    +1

    Brexit has to mean not being subject to laws made in Brussels and conceived in Berlin.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,729
    edited February 25
    Just a point of clarification.

    The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149

    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.

    Which is why everyone talking about a customs union would prefer us to not be leaving the EU in the first place. It’s just the latest in the long string of efforts by Continuity Remain to frustrate the expressed will of the people.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,663

    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.

    You can say that about every situation but being in the EU. Especially with the UK's opt outs.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367

    Good article, it's hard to see how she square's the circle with a tiny majority and two fundamentally divergent wings of her party.

    If only she hadn't flung away a stable majority

    Cameron's majority wasn't large enough to withstand 15 rebels voting against the government. That is why May tried to increase it.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,245

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Morris , I thought it was A customs union , not The Customs Union ?
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,041

    Just a point of clarification.

    The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.

    And what the f*ing bollocks does that even mean? A big steaming pile of turd fudge that's what it means.

    It means Brexit in name only, which is NOT leaving the EU and which is clearly worse than having at least 'some' influence.

    Better to Remain than effectively Remain whilst being kicked in the balls at the same time.

  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,255
    daodao said:

    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.

    +1

    Brexit has to mean not being subject to laws made in Brussels and conceived in Berlin.

    Brexit was not defined so could mean anything beyond leaving the EU. It’s why we’re in this mess.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,041
    Dura_Ace said:

    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.

    You can say that about every situation but being in the EU. Especially with the UK's opt outs.
    Wrong. You can argue that other positions have better or worse prospects and have different opinions on that. But this is all of the costs, and no benefits whatsoever.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Mr. City, that being a relevant difference, or a distinction without a difference, comes down to whether we'd be able to strike our own deals or leaving responsibility for such with the institution the electorate voted to leave.
  • Just a point of clarification.

    The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.

    And what the f*ing bollocks does that even mean? A big steaming pile of turd fudge that's what it means.

    It means Brexit in name only, which is NOT leaving the EU and which is clearly worse than having at least 'some' influence.

    Better to Remain than effectively Remain whilst being kicked in the balls at the same time.

    It is the Turkish option.

    Turkey is in A customs union with the EU but not in The customs union.

    A customs union solves the problem of the Northern Ireland border and makes sure there's no disruption to trade.

    Like I said the rebels are true patriots.

    Wanting to ruin the economy is the work of traitors and saboteurs.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,255
    No one has yet explained why we would get better trade deals with other countries than the 60 odd that the EU has managed (especially with Liam Fox in charge of the negotiations on our side) given our smaller economy and population. And it’s a fantasy to claim that we would no longer be bound by “red tape” as in practice we would have to follow the rules of the big boys.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,490

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. So, the actual reason must be indeed, to try to prevent Brexit.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,409
    Mr city,

    " I thought it was A customs union , not The Customs Union ?"

    You mean a cherry pick?

    Ruled out, surely?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,799

    Just a point of clarification.

    The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.

    And what the f*ing bollocks does that even mean? A big steaming pile of turd fudge that's what it means.

    It means Brexit in name only, which is NOT leaving the EU and which is clearly worse than having at least 'some' influence.

    Better to Remain than effectively Remain whilst being kicked in the balls at the same time.

    No, it really isn't better. Allowing 12 people to neuter the voice of a) the 52% in the Referendum and b) the 86%+ of people who voted for parties pledged to implement that voice would be catastrophic for faith in democracy.

    The LibDems only got 12 MPs elected in June 2017, but at least they have the fig leaf of a Manfesto commitment to a second referendum.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1 testing starts tomorrow. Huzzah!

    I couldn't watch the Six Nations yesterday due to a reception problem, but congratulations to Scotland. Did England not turn up, Scotland play well etc?

    For once, the prediction of the tournament being open has proved accurate.

    Scotland played really well in the first half and hung on ever more grimly in the second. England were very slow out of the blocks and really only applied the kind of pressure that you expect from them over the last 20 minutes. Even then as they got more desperate their execution was poor.

    There were a few narrow decisions that went Scotland's way which probably resulted in the score flattering them a bit but over the piece they deserved their win.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,245

    Mr. City, that being a relevant difference, or a distinction without a difference, comes down to whether we'd be able to strike our own deals or leaving responsibility for such with the institution the electorate voted to leave.

    Very true Morris , surely if they propose this , we will find out.
  • CD13 said:

    Mr city,

    " I thought it was A customs union , not The Customs Union ?"

    You mean a cherry pick?

    Ruled out, surely?

    Not a cherry pick, it is the Turkish option.

    Perhaps we could call it Turkish delight.
  • Very interesting TSE.

    The strongest part of your argument is that many Tory MPs might conclude that the best way of avoiding the shitstorm that is Brexit would be to precipitate an election and suffer Corbyn as PM for five years. It's not a very happy prospect but compared with hanging in there, taking the full rap for the Brexit fiasco and seeing the Party reduced in due course to Liberal Democrat proportions isn't exactly enticing either.

    Not sure.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,663

    Just a point of clarification.

    The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.

    And what the f*ing bollocks does that even mean? A big steaming pile of turd fudge that's what it means.

    It means Brexit in name only, which is NOT leaving the EU and which is clearly worse than having at least 'some' influence.

    Better to Remain than effectively Remain whilst being kicked in the balls at the same time.

    We really are privileged to be spectators to the deroulement of this madness.

    Bliss it was in that dawn to be alive. But to be middle aged was very heaven
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,907
    How does choosing to join a customs union differ from any other decision to co-operate internationally? We gain some things and lose some others. It's much the same as joining NATO or the UN in that respect.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,490

    Very interesting TSE.

    The strongest part of your argument is that many Tory MPs might conclude that the best way of avoiding the shitstorm that is Brexit would be to precipitate an election and suffer Corbyn as PM for five years. It's not a very happy prospect but compared with hanging in there, taking the full rap for the Brexit fiasco and seeing the Party reduced in due course to Liberal Democrat proportions isn't exactly enticing either.

    Not sure.

    Inflicting a very left wing government on us, simply because they can't make their minds up about Brexit, would be utterly self-indulgent.
  • Just a point of clarification.

    The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.

    And what the f*ing bollocks does that even mean? A big steaming pile of turd fudge that's what it means.

    It means Brexit in name only, which is NOT leaving the EU
    Yes it is. It’s “technically correct, which is the best form of correct” as they say on Reddit.

    If Brexiters wanted an irrevocable guarantee that Leave meant not just the formal EU but also SM/CU, they should have got it on the ballot paper.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,773
    edited February 25

    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.

    But is borrowing a tariff schedule more stupid than throwing away our automotive manufacturing and other industries that depend on frictionless borders, as well as tearing up the Good Friday Agreement?

    Your lot need to make some choices. We can respect the vote with a limited rule taking Brexit, we can remain connected with Europe in a connected world, or we can scorch the earth. I voted Remain. I can't make those choices for you.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,255

    How does choosing to join a customs union differ from any other decision to co-operate internationally? We gain some things and lose some others. It's much the same as joining NATO or the UN in that respect.

    Indeed - many on here have a rather 18th century view of sovereignty that simply isn’t compatible with the modern inter-connected world.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,815
    Ah the weekly May and the Cons will commit political suicide praywank.

    People really need to use head over heart. Or hand.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,490
    edited February 25

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
    I don't want to be the collateral damage for people who are seeking revenge for the past.

    I regard JRM and Dominic Grieve as being equally unhelpful.
  • daodao said:

    It seems a incredibly stupid fudge to remain in the Customs Union, but not part of the EU.

    In that situation, we would clearly be better off in the EU proper.

    +1

    Brexit has to mean not being subject to laws made in Brussels and conceived in Berlin.

    Brexit was not defined so could mean anything beyond leaving the EU. It’s why we’re in this mess.
    That is correct.

    The wording on the ballot paper was such that anything from Hard Brexit to LINO (leaving in name only) would allow the Government to say legitimately 'job done'. Just how many people they would piss off at any point in that range is your guess as much as mine, but at least they could say 'that's what you voted for, folks.'
  • Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
    I don't want to be the collateral damage for people who are seeking revenge for the past.
    We may not have much choice, SeanF.
  • Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
    I don't want to be the collateral damage for people who are seeking revenge for the past.
    Whereas Brexit is the collateral damage for people who are seeking a return to the past.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149
    Surely the vote will be a three line whip with knobs on? Any Conservative voting against it can expect to lose the whip - and if an election results can expect not to be selected.

    A dozen Conservative abstentions is just about doable.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,815
    edited February 25

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
    Soubry couldn’t cut it as a minister - she’s still bitter about that - she should look to her own failings rather than grandstanding and lobbying for big corporations.
  • Sean_F said:

    Very interesting TSE.

    The strongest part of your argument is that many Tory MPs might conclude that the best way of avoiding the shitstorm that is Brexit would be to precipitate an election and suffer Corbyn as PM for five years. It's not a very happy prospect but compared with hanging in there, taking the full rap for the Brexit fiasco and seeing the Party reduced in due course to Liberal Democrat proportions isn't exactly enticing either.

    Not sure.

    Inflicting a very left wing government on us, simply because they can't make their minds up about Brexit, would be utterly self-indulgent.
    And they have not shown signs of self-indulgence already? Pftt....
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,255
    edited February 25
    Sandpit said:

    Surely the vote will be a three line whip with knobs on? Any Conservative voting against it can expect to lose the whip - and if an election results can expect not to be selected.

    A dozen Conservative abstentions is just about doable.

    Not an issue for Ken Clarke; he’s retiring anyway.

    Won’t the DUP want the customs union given their red line of no hard border?
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 4,322
    edited February 25

    How does choosing to join a customs union differ from any other decision to co-operate internationally? We gain some things and lose some others. It's much the same as joining NATO or the UN in that respect.

    Indeed - many on here have a rather 18th century view of sovereignty that simply isn’t compatible with the modern inter-connected world.
    You are too generous. It's not even 18th C. It is La La Land.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,490

    Sean_F said:

    Very interesting TSE.

    The strongest part of your argument is that many Tory MPs might conclude that the best way of avoiding the shitstorm that is Brexit would be to precipitate an election and suffer Corbyn as PM for five years. It's not a very happy prospect but compared with hanging in there, taking the full rap for the Brexit fiasco and seeing the Party reduced in due course to Liberal Democrat proportions isn't exactly enticing either.

    Not sure.

    Inflicting a very left wing government on us, simply because they can't make their minds up about Brexit, would be utterly self-indulgent.
    And they have not shown signs of self-indulgence already? Pftt....
    Sadly true.
  • Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Very interesting TSE.

    The strongest part of your argument is that many Tory MPs might conclude that the best way of avoiding the shitstorm that is Brexit would be to precipitate an election and suffer Corbyn as PM for five years. It's not a very happy prospect but compared with hanging in there, taking the full rap for the Brexit fiasco and seeing the Party reduced in due course to Liberal Democrat proportions isn't exactly enticing either.

    Not sure.

    Inflicting a very left wing government on us, simply because they can't make their minds up about Brexit, would be utterly self-indulgent.
    And they have not shown signs of self-indulgence already? Pftt....
    Sadly true.
    Thanks you SeanF. We find ourselves agreeing a lot these days, though perhaps not on the spelling of Pftt......

    Anyway I'm off. It's a nice day and for some reason thinking about Brexit makes my brain hurt.

    Have a nice Sunday.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367
    On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this. She is clearly working hard to ensure that the Cabinet is backing her 100% and reaching out to as much of the party as possible. That is the right approach.

    I also think we also need to have a think about what on earth we mean by A Customs Union. The key element of a Customs Union involves a common external tariff. If it simply involves no tariffs internally it is a FTA. If we have a common external tariff then we are tied into the deals that EU has with the rest of the world. That may be a good thing for us of course since it means that we don't have to do our own but it is certainly giving up a lot of control for a potential benefit.

    A Customs Union can differ from The Customs Union in terms of its universality. So the Customs Union with Turkey, for example, does not cover all goods and very little in the way of services. The problem I see with that is that if we don't have universality how does A Customs Union solve the NI problem? If the EU are really serious about the no pick and mix and reject the three basket proposal of the UK how is A Customs Union going to work or ever be agreed?

    This is, I think, one of the reasons for the incredibly vague proposal that the rebels are putting forward. The practicalities in the time available are such that I think we either don't have a CU at all or we have The CU. I think they know that but are playing coy. What we really want is a FTA for both goods and services with an emphasis on reducing the inevitable friction arising from imported goods and goods with a significant third party contribution. Whether the EU are up for that remains to be seen but there were hopeful signs until this nonsense started.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Mr. L, good. England have been lacklustre (well, in the first two matches). If Scotland can beat Ireland, the tournament is still on.

    Although I did decline to back them for winning it. Anyway, F1 (sort of) starts tomorrow. Keen to see which engines blow up the most.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197
    The Tory party is an utter mess. Discipline has broken down. Until they replace May and restore authority anything is possible.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197
    One comfort for Tories, when Corbyn becomes PM he will be dependent on John Woodcock, Jess Phillips and the rest of the PLP.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,466
    edited February 25

    "some Tories may decide that managing Brexit is just too damaging for the Tories and they might abstain in a Parliamentary vote and make Corbyn PM."

    It's called governing. It requires taking tough decisions. If they can't take them, they shouldn't be MPs.

    I hate to give the Tories good advice, but IF they are correct that Corbyn would be a poor PM, then their best strategy is to let him try to govern briefly with a messy majority depending on SNP and LibDems and hardline Lsbour First centrists and prove incompetent, while they elect a shiny new leader, then expect to win the inevitable election within a year. I don't honestly think they're going to be able to trash his reputation decisively until he's had a go and failed.

    I think he'll be just fine, but I'm your local friendly Momentum activist :).
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,773
    DavidL said:

    On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this. She is clearly working hard to ensure that the Cabinet is backing her 100% and reaching out to as much of the party as possible. That is the right approach.

    I also think we also need to have a think about what on earth we mean by A Customs Union. The key element of a Customs Union involves a common external tariff. If it simply involves no tariffs internally it is a FTA. If we have a common external tariff then we are tied into the deals that EU has with the rest of the world. That may be a good thing for us of course since it means that we don't have to do our own but it is certainly giving up a lot of control for a potential benefit.

    A Customs Union can differ from The Customs Union in terms of its universality. So the Customs Union with Turkey, for example, does not cover all goods and very little in the way of services. The problem I see with that is that if we don't have universality how does A Customs Union solve the NI problem? If the EU are really serious about the no pick and mix and reject the three basket proposal of the UK how is A Customs Union going to work or ever be agreed?

    This is, I think, one of the reasons for the incredibly vague proposal that the rebels are putting forward. The practicalities in the time available are such that I think we either don't have a CU at all or we have The CU. I think they know that but are playing coy. What we really want is a FTA for both goods and services with an emphasis on reducing the inevitable friction arising from imported goods and goods with a significant third party contribution. Whether the EU are up for that remains to be seen but there were hopeful signs until this nonsense started.

    I suspect you are right. May has to win this vote. But we'll probably end up in the Customs Union anyway. And very likely the Single Market too. Reality will win in the end.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    edited February 25
    Another article in the Times:

    There was an immediate understanding that May had played her cards well. “Her wisdom was that she got Olly to explain it,” one cabinet minister said. “If it was a complete stinker then it would have been Olly who got lacerated.” Instead, Robbins received plaudits, even from Brexiteers who have seen him as a malign force guiding Britain to a softer EU exit than they would like.

    “It was like watching live television,” one minister said. “You didn’t know whether it was all going to end in tears or not. She held the room. She’s got the title and the status but it felt much more like she rose to it. People finished with a new-found respect for her.” Another added: “She did an absolutely brilliant job. She kept everybody guessing.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-gets-her-way-on-brexit-with-cluedo-and-shortbread-vnnm9lqml

    I can’t imagine why TSE didn’t lead with this one...
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,815

    Sandpit said:

    Surely the vote will be a three line whip with knobs on? Any Conservative voting against it can expect to lose the whip - and if an election results can expect not to be selected.

    A dozen Conservative abstentions is just about doable.

    Not an issue for Ken Clarke; he’s retiring anyway.

    Won’t the DUP want the customs union given their red line of no hard border?
    There will be no hard border. CU or not.

    If you believe there will be - please detail whether it’s the ROI or the EU that will be is building and paying for it.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,552

    No, it really isn't better. Allowing 12 people to neuter the voice of a) the 52% in the Referendum and b) the 86%+ of people who voted for parties pledged to implement that voice would be catastrophic for faith in democracy.

    The LibDems only got 12 MPs elected in June 2017, but at least they have the fig leaf of a Manfesto commitment to a second referendum.

    More exactly a first referendum, Mr Mark, on whether to remain in the EU as now, or leave with whatever conditions your pathetic Conservative Government manages to contrive.

    The "first referendum" was just vapid bilge, designed to hold the Conservative Party together. In which it has failed, of course.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,392
    The New Bastards.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,988

    How does choosing to join a customs union differ from any other decision to co-operate internationally? We gain some things and lose some others. It's much the same as joining NATO or the UN in that respect.

    Or not really leaving the EU, just pretending to.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197

    "some Tories may decide that managing Brexit is just too damaging for the Tories and they might abstain in a Parliamentary vote and make Corbyn PM."

    It's called governing. It requires taking tough decisions. If they can't take them, they shouldn't be MPs.

    I hate to give the Tories good advice, but IF they are correct that Corbyn would be a poor PM, then their best strategy is to let him try to govern briefly with a messy majority depending on SNP and LibDems and hardline Lsbour First centrists and prove incompetent, while they elect a shiny new leader, then expect to win the inevitable election within a year. I don't honestly think they're going to be able to trash his reputation decisively until he's had a go and failed.

    I think he'll be just fine, but I'm your local friendly Momentum activist :).
    Good grief, you're part of the cult too.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,189
    Mr. Royale, surely 'le Bastards'?
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,250
    I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617
    CD13 said:

    Mr city,

    " I thought it was A customs union , not The Customs Union ?"

    You mean a cherry pick?

    Ruled out, surely?

    When the UK wants to do it it’s “cherry picking”

    When the EU wants to do it (security etc) it’s “sensible cooperation”....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
    I don't want to be the collateral damage for people who are seeking revenge for the past.

    I regard JRM and Dominic Grieve as being equally unhelpful.
    Your first sentence seems slightly odd: it isn't about revenge: it's about what individuals believe is best for the country. In the 1990s and 2000s, a small coterie of Conservatives helped bring down Major over the EU. They set a precedent. Now, some Conservative MPs who might be lock in-step with those 'bastards' over most issues facing the country, are risking doing the same.

    I'm all for MPs going against the party line - I believe whipping, whilst sadly necessary, is a slight perversion of democracy. Let MPs vote the way they believe is best for their constituents and the country, and let the voters give their verdict on how they voted at the next election.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,521

    "some Tories may decide that managing Brexit is just too damaging for the Tories and they might abstain in a Parliamentary vote and make Corbyn PM."

    It's called governing. It requires taking tough decisions. If they can't take them, they shouldn't be MPs.

    I hate to give the Tories good advice, but IF they are correct that Corbyn would be a poor PM, then their best strategy is to let him try to govern briefly with a messy majority depending on SNP and LibDems and hardline Lsbour First centrists and prove incompetent, while they elect a shiny new leader, then expect to win the inevitable election within a year. I don't honestly think they're going to be able to trash his reputation decisively until he's had a go and failed.

    I think he'll be just fine, but I'm your local friendly Momentum activist :).
    Never a truer word spoken in jest...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,988
    DavidL said:

    On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this. She is clearly working hard to ensure that the Cabinet is backing her 100% and reaching out to as much of the party as possible. That is the right approach.

    I also think we also need to have a think about what on earth we mean by A Customs Union. The key element of a Customs Union involves a common external tariff. If it simply involves no tariffs internally it is a FTA. If we have a common external tariff then we are tied into the deals that EU has with the rest of the world. That may be a good thing for us of course since it means that we don't have to do our own but it is certainly giving up a lot of control for a potential benefit.

    A Customs Union can differ from The Customs Union in terms of its universality. So the Customs Union with Turkey, for example, does not cover all goods and very little in the way of services. The problem I see with that is that if we don't have universality how does A Customs Union solve the NI problem? If the EU are really serious about the no pick and mix and reject the three basket proposal of the UK how is A Customs Union going to work or ever be agreed?

    This is, I think, one of the reasons for the incredibly vague proposal that the rebels are putting forward. The practicalities in the time available are such that I think we either don't have a CU at all or we have The CU. I think they know that but are playing coy. What we really want is a FTA for both goods and services with an emphasis on reducing the inevitable friction arising from imported goods and goods with a significant third party contribution. Whether the EU are up for that remains to be seen but there were hopeful signs until this nonsense started.

    David, very eloquent but could be put simpler. We will be outside , paying plenty with no influence just to be able to trade with EU all for the vanity of a few Tories to pretend they are sovereign.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 1,513
    The Single Market would, I think, rule out Labour's public ownership plans. But would "a" or "the" Customs Union do so?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,392

    Just a point of clarification.

    The vote will be to keep us in A customs union, not The customs union.

    The Kobayashi Maru play on that would be to create one just for a single insignificant category of goods, say aluminium widgets only, whilst not having it for anything else.

    That would respect the parliamentary vote, and troll the new bastards superbly.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,729
    edited February 25

    Another article in the Times:

    There was an immediate understanding that May had played her cards well. “Her wisdom was that she got Olly to explain it,” one cabinet minister said. “If it was a complete stinker then it would have been Olly who got lacerated.” Instead, Robbins received plaudits, even from Brexiteers who have seen him as a malign force guiding Britain to a softer EU exit than they would like.

    “It was like watching live television,” one minister said. “You didn’t know whether it was all going to end in tears or not. She held the room. She’s got the title and the status but it felt much more like she rose to it. People finished with a new-found respect for her.” Another added: “She did an absolutely brilliant job. She kept everybody guessing.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-gets-her-way-on-brexit-with-cluedo-and-shortbread-vnnm9lqml

    I can’t imagine why TSE didn’t lead with this one...

    I very nearly did. It contains this wonderful passage.

    Some Eurosceptics outside the cabinet put little faith in May and her team holding their fragile truce together in the face of intransigence in Brussels.

    “Cabinet continues to live in a parallel universe,” one said. “The DD-May plan is doomed. Barnier will smash DD over the head and No 10 will fold as always.”


    Both articles cover the same major issue, the government and Mrs May are at risk of falling, since this is a betting website, I looked at the betting angle.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,988

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
    I don't want to be the collateral damage for people who are seeking revenge for the past.

    I regard JRM and Dominic Grieve as being equally unhelpful.
    Your first sentence seems slightly odd: it isn't about revenge: it's about what individuals believe is best for the country. In the 1990s and 2000s, a small coterie of Conservatives helped bring down Major over the EU. They set a precedent. Now, some Conservative MPs who might be lock in-step with those 'bastards' over most issues facing the country, are risking doing the same.

    I'm all for MPs going against the party line - I believe whipping, whilst sadly necessary, is a slight perversion of democracy. Let MPs vote the way they believe is best for their constituents and the country, and let the voters give their verdict on how they voted at the next election.
    get the sheep lined up
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,988
    RoyalBlue said:

    I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.

    the sooner the better
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 24,392
    RoyalBlue said:

    I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.

    If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.

    It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,490
    RoyalBlue said:

    I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.

    OTOH, the government has won crucial votes so far, with bigger majorities than I expected.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149
    malcolmg said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.

    I find the Europhobes who are foaming at the mouth over Soubry, Clarke etc to be hilarious. They are getting some of their own medicine and not liking it.

    It's a shame that it'll be so bad for the country. But the antics of the 'bastards' in he 1990s was bad for the country as well, and set a precedent in the party.

    I'd vote for a Soubry-style Conservative party over a JRM-style one any day. Leaving aside the EU, she seems solid Tory. And I bet I'm not alone in that.

    (Note: I am not saying that Soubry would want to be leader; just that someone of her ilk (leaving aside the EU views) might be quite electable).
    I don't want to be the collateral damage for people who are seeking revenge for the past.

    I regard JRM and Dominic Grieve as being equally unhelpful.
    Your first sentence seems slightly odd: it isn't about revenge: it's about what individuals believe is best for the country. In the 1990s and 2000s, a small coterie of Conservatives helped bring down Major over the EU. They set a precedent. Now, some Conservative MPs who might be lock in-step with those 'bastards' over most issues facing the country, are risking doing the same.

    I'm all for MPs going against the party line - I believe whipping, whilst sadly necessary, is a slight perversion of democracy. Let MPs vote the way they believe is best for their constituents and the country, and let the voters give their verdict on how they voted at the next election.
    get the sheep lined up
    Sounds like a Scottish rugby party!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,517
    CD13 said:

    Mr city,

    " I thought it was A customs union , not The Customs Union ?"

    You mean a cherry pick?

    Ruled out, surely?

    I was struck once again this week about the parallels between Trump and Brexit.

    The Donald was whining that people thought he had said he wanted guns in classrooms, and he had to clarify that what he actually wanted was SOME guns in SOME classrooms...

    Meanwhile, the one immutable rule of Brexit has been, and continues to be, no cherry picking.

    No problem, said the Brexit cabinet away day. We only want to pick SOME cherries.

    Job done, right?
  • O/T - David 'Pink' Floyd the Daily Telegraph journalist who worked for the KGB was 'educated' at The University of Oxford.

    Tom Driberg, Roger Hollis, Harold Wilson, and now Floyd, the dump really is a nest of traitors.

    Why does MI5/MI6 keep on covering up the traitors at Oxford?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974

    The New Bastards.

    Yep. But if you accept that, then the criticisms you give them also apply to IDS, Cash et al. And in their case, one of them even made it to the top of the party within a few years. Soubry for party leader? ;)

    To make it clear, I think what the rebels are doing is dangerous for the country. It's not what I would do in their place, and I'm unsure what they want is even possible. However, it is hard to say they shouldn't be doing it, given the track record of the Europhobes in the party, and the cack-handed way May's government is approaching the whole Brexit mess.

    Brexit is subsuming good politics and governance in this country. It should not be.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,517
    DavidL said:

    On topic I think May has no choice but to try to face this down. If she loses she probably has to resign and the government may well fall but she really cannot undertake the negotiations with the EU being held to ransom like this.

    She is already being held to ransom by the Ultras.

    At least the new bastards have a grip on reality...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,149

    RoyalBlue said:

    I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.

    If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.

    It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
    And of course the ERG types will mostly be happy with no deal.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,617

    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Slackbladder, that may very well be the intention of those seeking to keep us in the customs union. Get us a deal that they can take to the country claiming to be worse than the status quo, then ask for referendum 2.

    Ostensibly, it seems a strange cause to be prepared to bring down the government (and end one's political career) over. (Snip)
    Tell that to the Eurosceptic 'bastards' who helped bring down Major's government.
    .
    Major’s second government served its full term.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,197
    All this is the inevitable consequence of sticking with a PM with zero authority . The rebels are not to blame, it's the inaction of the whole party that's lost its ruthless streak.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,799
    Sandpit said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    I’m convinced we will have an election, second referendum or change of government this year. The Tory rebels have tasted blood. They will bring down May’s government.

    If the New Bastards rebel with the help of the Opposition, the ERG will rebel against whatever they've imposed and refuse to back the deal.

    It just raises the overall prospect of no deal and the fall of the Government.
    And of course the ERG types will mostly be happy with no deal.
    Which is ultimately where the Axis of Grieve is screwed.....
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367
    Another problem that arises from ACU or TCU going forward is that it is the EU who negotiates any future deals. Are we really wanting them to do that for us (even if they were willing)? Its been bad enough as a Member with deal after deal focussing on manufacturing and agriculture rather than access for our service industries. In theory we could come along too for the discussion but as long as we are tied to the EU by ACU or TCU we will have no negotiating position at all.

    What does ACU give to the NI situation that a FTA doesn't? Well, for the classes of goods it covers we would not have to worry about external content so for those classes of goods the border is less of an issue. But if one considers the total trade between NI and the Republic is roughly £1.5bn of exports from Eire and £1bn of imports one sees that this is not a massive amount of trade to be regulated and to have agreements about content etc about. Once Eire has agreed that the foreign content of a Dell is, say, 40% of the value it is not necessary to have any more checks on their deliveries.
This discussion has been closed.