So Theresa May's sold Brexiteers down the river. She's sold Northern Ireland down the river.
Presumably she'll be selling Gibraltar down the river next?
No, she may possibly have sold the DUP down the river, she has not sold Northern Ireland down the river as Northern Ireland voted Remain and most Northern Ireland voters want to stay in the single market and customs union.
On Gibraltar Spain wants matters to be negotiated largely outside the EU with Britain
RE: Spain and Gibraltar. Some people will jump on any old spin being put out for national consumption (in Spain). Spain says it'll oppose Withdrawal agreement over which they have no veto, unless it gives them the right to veto any final agreement over role of Gibraltar (which they already have). It's almost Paterson and Davis in Oklahoma.
Both Corbyn and May are helped by the utter uselessness of their opponents and rebels within their parties who could not launch a successful coup if their lives depended on it
So Theresa May's sold Brexiteers down the river. She's sold Northern Ireland down the river.
Presumably she'll be selling Gibraltar down the river next?
TM has achieved a deal beyond the wildest expectations of David Cameron and would have been taken with open arms by ERG at that time.
Well yes because at the time of his renegotiation we hadn't had the referendum.
Then we had the referendum and voted to leave but Theresa May has come up with a deal that gives no end date on leaving the customs union and gives the final say on whether we can be allowed to leave the customs union to the EU (who are openly set on destroying the country by making us give up Northern Ireland if we ever want to truly leave)
So we're never actually going to leave and the referendum result has basically been overturned.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
I've had enough of the entire shit show.
I just want the Conservatives gone now. Theresa. Boris. JRM. Baker. Soubry. Gove. Hammond.
Please begone all of them.
I would not use your language but I agree they are a useless shambles, just look at the cabinet, apart from Mr Cox, just incompetent.
Both Corbyn and May are helped by the utter uselessness of their opponents and rebels within their parties who could not launch a successful coup if their lives depended on it
I think that's somewhat unfair on the Labour Rebels actually. It's not actually clear what more they could have done to get rid of Corbyn, if a VonC being passed by 90% of the party couldn't do it. They were just thwarted by the rules.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
I've had enough of the entire shit show.
I just want the Conservatives gone now. Theresa. Boris. JRM. Baker. Soubry. Gove. Hammond.
Please begone all of them.
I would not use your language but I agree they are a useless shambles, just look at the cabinet, apart from Mr Cox, just incompetent.
It is ERG who are the shambles and have become a laughing stock
FPT some seem to think it is the wrong verb to suggest Northern Ireland would be subjugated to the EU by being compelled to follow Single Market rules without having any MEPs or European Council votes etc to shape them.
I would suggest the definition of subjugation is to be subordinate or under the control of an external force. The population of Northern Ireland would not be a part of the EU but forced - without their consent - to follow its rules. That is subjugation. Where other nations have unilaterally chosen to follow Single Market rules that is their choice and they can choose to do so. Compelling people and not letting them democratically choose to diverge is controlling them. It is subjugation.
If Northern Ireland votes (or their representatives vote) to follow SM rules and that is their choice and they can unilaterally end it then that would be a choice and not subjugation. If they have no choice and no say then they are subjugated.
Northern Ireland voted to Remain.
Those who turn up at Westminster represent those who voted Leave.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
I've had enough of the entire shit show.
I just want the Conservatives gone now. Theresa. Boris. JRM. Baker. Soubry. Gove. Hammond.
Please begone all of them.
I would not use your language but I agree they are a useless shambles, just look at the cabinet, apart from Mr Cox, just incompetent.
It is ERG who are the shambles and have become a laughing stock
The whole of the Conservative Party is a shambles from the dreadful duo of Theresa May and Philip Hammond down...
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
Both Corbyn and May are helped by the utter uselessness of their opponents and rebels within their parties who could not launch a successful coup if their lives depended on it
I think that's somewhat unfair on the Labour Rebels actually. It's not actually clear what more they could have done to get rid of Corbyn, if a VonC being passed by 90% of the party couldn't do it. They were just thwarted by the rules.
The fact the best candidate they could find to take on Corbyn was Owen Smith says it all
If your going to launch a coup to oust the Prime Minister you'd better make sure you've got the numbers first!
How many times?????
LBJ said that the first rule of politics was to be able to count.
I'm not sure LBJ ever did say that, but interestingly lots of British political hacks quote it. If you search for it, the results seem to be predominantly both British and recent, which is discouraging.
I did half-wonder whether the misquotation, if so it be, originates with George Osborne, who has a Thing for LBJ. I can imagine Osborne saying something in conversation about Johnson's formidable vote-counting skills that was misconstrued by someone party to the conversation as a quotable quote by the great man. Might be a slightly fanciful guess at the identification, but there aren't that many people in British politics in recent years (when the "being able to count" quote seems to have originated) with such an interest in US politics in general and LBJ in particular.
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit. Which is why she's come back with a bucket of warm sick for a deal, and is now raising the possibility of keeping the status quo. If she got anything better, this would not have worked - a grateful public would have just wanted her to get on with it.
I'm not calling her a bad person for trying to do so - I am sure she means well, and I imagine she's been scared shitless by countless intelligence briefings about how life jettisoned from the EU will be some sort of terrorist wasteland, which have found fertile ground in her naturally statist and somewhat authoritarian mindset. She no doubt thinks she's doing the right thing, in the midst of doing something that is in actuality, exceptionally damaging.
It will fail though. She and the people on her side really do have failure written through them like Blackpool rock - it's inescapable that their fears will come to pass. We will Brexit, and the country will succeed outside the EU. How that happens, I have no idea, but I'm looking forward to seeing.
An Olympic gold medallist's curling team has been kicked out of the Red Deer Curling Classic tournament for poor behaviour and drunkenness.
Ryan Fry, who won gold for Canada at the 2014 Winter Olympics, and team mates Jamie Koe, Chris Schille, and DJ Kidby forfeited their final game after fans and opponents complained.
The group reportedly broke brooms and damaged locker rooms.
Who would have thought a curling tournament could be wilder than a night out in Essex
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
The discovery that the ERG are eight letters short of a coup shouldn't come as any surprise.
An Olympic gold medallist's curling team has been kicked out of the Red Deer Curling Classic tournament for poor behaviour and drunkenness.
Ryan Fry, who won gold for Canada at the 2014 Winter Olympics, and team mates Jamie Koe, Chris Schille, and DJ Kidby forfeited their final game after fans and opponents complained.
The group reportedly broke brooms and damaged locker rooms.
Who would have thought a curling tournament could be wilder than a night out in Essex
Interesting arithmetic in there. 60% of voters over 16 would vote No. 67% of voters over 18 would vote No. With back of fag packet calculation I work out 250% of voters aged 16 and 17 will vote Yes.
The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
Not sure about that.
When Corbyn becomes Prime Minister we may find another revolution of a very different kind starts to take place...
Oh yes. The AV referendum will seem downright quaint when we’re queuing for loaves of bread that cost £250,000 each.
And people like you will help bring it about, out of spite.
Soon be time to invest in a bread maker?
Forget that. The electricity will be out. Hoard flour. And either get a gas oven that doesn't require electricity to ignite (increasingly rare nowadays) and buy lots of big gas bottles for it, or stock up on wood or coal.
The only reason could be that Mourdant wants to stay in her job and still vote against.
Talk about keeping your cushy office car and driver...
Probably partly that. And also that the ERG are skilled at staggering what they do and a reason has been prepared for her to flounce. Cabinet meeting tomorrow. 1922 meeting Wednesday.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
The discovery that the ERG are eight letters short of a coup shouldn't come as any surprise.
Yet these are the guys the ultras think should be running the country and negotiating the deal. God help us
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit.
No, and that's ridiculous, because it assumes she is amazingly competent and managed to arrange this whole scenario.
So she is totally incompetent and wanted a rock hard brexit but ended up with a soft brexit?
I doubt she wanted rock hard brexit but she is clearly not so competent as to pull off a Machiavellian scheme, as 2017 showed. What it looks like is she tried to walk a line between party factions as long as possible then went softer as things closed up. It has not been done with a sense of assurance.
Acting like she is some mastermind, and so presumably wanted to appear as deal as she has for so long, stretches credibility.
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit. Which is why she's come back with a bucket of warm sick for a deal, and is now raising the possibility of keeping the status quo. If she got anything better, this would not have worked - a grateful public would have just wanted her to get on with it.
I'm not calling her a bad person for trying to do so - I am sure she means well, and I imagine she's been scared shitless by countless intelligence briefings about how life jettisoned from the EU will be some sort of terrorist wasteland, which have found fertile ground in her naturally statist and somewhat authoritarian mindset. She no doubt thinks she's doing the right thing, in the midst of doing something that is in actuality, exceptionally damaging.
It will fail though. She and the people on her side really do have failure written through them like Blackpool rock - it's inescapable that their fears will come to pass. We will Brexit, and the country will succeed outside the EU. How that happens, I have no idea, but I'm looking forward to seeing.
Unfortunately nobody else knows how it will happen either so the odds are increasing that we won't. I am convinced it's May's deal or nothing now.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
The discovery that the ERG are eight letters short of a coup shouldn't come as any surprise.
Yet these are the guys the ultras think should be running the country and negotiating the deal. God help us
The Ultras plan is to get Corbyn into government, hope he bungles running the country, and they take over to clean up the mess.
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
It does occasionally work in the opposite way. My wife is from a very working-class background, first to go to university on her father’s side, etc, and she got into an Ivy League school on merit. That meant her sister, whose grades weren’t quite good enough on her own, got into the same Ivy as a “legacy”.
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit.
No, and that's ridiculous, because it assumes she is amazingly competent and managed to arrange this whole scenario.
It assumes she's determined, and able, with support from the civil service, to conduct a deliberately weak negotiation, yes. No doubt the EU was bemused by it all but were hardly going to look a gift horse in the mouth.
To make 'Brexiting' work well, and be seen to be working well, and worse, leave the EU looking weak and perhaps on the brink of collapse, if you think about it, would have been inconceivable to someone that invested in supporting the status quo.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
The discovery that the ERG are eight letters short of a coup shouldn't come as any surprise.
Yet these are the guys the ultras think should be running the country and negotiating the deal. God help us
The Ultras plan is to get Corbyn into government, hope he bungles running the country, and they take over to clean up the mess.
By choosing not to support the government in a number of votes on the Finance Bill, the DUP have withdrawn from the "supply" part of their "confidence and supply" agreement.
Good question. But then their ideology kicks in: "No surrender" and "English betrayal". If someone really wanted to wind them up, they'd arrange a Theresa May-Michel Barnier meeting in Rome
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit.
No, and that's ridiculous, because it assumes she is amazingly competent and managed to arrange this whole scenario.
So she is totally incompetent and wanted a rock hard brexit but ended up with a soft brexit?
I doubt she wanted rock hard brexit but she is clearly not so competent as to pull off a Machiavellian scheme, as 2017 showed. What it looks like is she tried to walk a line between party factions as long as possible then went softer as things closed up. It has not been done with a sense of assurance.
Acting like she is some mastermind, and so presumably wanted to appear as deal as she has for so long, stretches credibility.
I agree that her primary concern was keeping the Tory Party together and that it has gone a bit wrong.
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit.
No, and that's ridiculous, because it assumes she is amazingly competent and managed to arrange this whole scenario.
So she is totally incompetent and wanted a rock hard brexit but ended up with a soft brexit?
I suspect that she made three errors:
1. She thought the EU would be more desperate to accomodate the UK than they have been. 2. She failed to realise the damage a No Deal Brexit would have on the UK's other trading relationships. 3. She thought that (the newly loyal) Dr Fox would do a better job of at least replicating the EU's existing relationships.
So no vnoc until after the vote in the mddle of next month. The constituency chairs must have scare some of them witless. It is so funny if it was not so serious
The discovery that the ERG are eight letters short of a coup shouldn't come as any surprise.
Yet these are the guys the ultras think should be running the country and negotiating the deal. God help us
I'm not really sure what anyone thinks they've done wrong. Apparently only 40 people have written letters - what were those 40 people to do - not write them?
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit. Which is why she's come back with a bucket of warm sick for a deal, and is now raising the possibility of keeping the status quo. If she got anything better, this would not have worked - a grateful public would have just wanted her to get on with it.
I'm not calling her a bad person for trying to do so - I am sure she means well, and I imagine she's been scared shitless by countless intelligence briefings about how life jettisoned from the EU will be some sort of terrorist wasteland, which have found fertile ground in her naturally statist and somewhat authoritarian mindset. She no doubt thinks she's doing the right thing, in the midst of doing something that is in actuality, exceptionally damaging.
It will fail though. She and the people on her side really do have failure written through them like Blackpool rock - it's inescapable that their fears will come to pass. We will Brexit, and the country will succeed outside the EU. How that happens, I have no idea, but I'm looking forward to seeing.
Unfortunately nobody else knows how it will happen either so the odds are increasing that we won't. I am convinced it's May's deal or nothing now.
The odds were a million to one against us voting to leave in the first place. Yet it happened. Some things are historical, cyclical changes, and attempts to thwart them, from a historical perspective, just look like handloom weavers breaking machines.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
I do not think money will work. They feel betrayed, I would think their price is a new PM. Why they keep up the mantra of our deal is with the Tory Party not TM.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
Nobody ever went broke overestimating the stupidity of MPs. In this specific instance, as observed yesterday, Starmer genuinely believes he can make things happen by legislating for them. Now it appears he genuinely believes he can stop things happen by not legislating for them. Yes, he is that dumb.
I fear I may harp on about this frequently over the coming months: many MPs are stupid or mendacious or isolated from reality and there are enough of them to fuck things up.
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
Just like his lot lied to the British people during the referendum.
Oh dear.
Hmm -- the Mail readers don't seem happy with the paper's recent change of stance. Among the best-rated comments on that article are:
"ENOUGH of this blatant propaganda, DM. Traitor May has lied to her voters and destroyed democracy in this country. She's got to go."
and
"What has happened to the DM? Why has it suddenly morphed into the Guardian? The Guardian is an impoverished sinking ship, is that the publisher's intention for the DM, too? Because if its editorial continues in this vein, that's exactly what's going to happen."
If so could possibly give May some room for further negotiation if Barnier cannot hold his side together first
Spain can't actually veto the deal from the EU side
The EU can put whatever conditions it likes into the treaty as long as the UK agrees. Then the bespoke veto is in there. In practice Spain probably has a veto anyway. It's very hard to get these big agreements away if someone really objects.
No, the deal is subject to QMV on the EU side. Spain cannot veto it unless there are a significant minority of other countries who support them.
Surely it must be clear to all now that Theresa May's aim all along has been to prevent Brexit. Which is why she's come back with a bucket of warm sick for a deal, and is now raising the possibility of keeping the status quo. If she got anything better, this would not have worked - a grateful public would have just wanted her to get on with it.
And what exactly would a "better" deal look like?
There really isn't much room to manouevre if you want to keep the Irish border open and restrict freedom of movement. May has come up with a "Home Office" Brexit - one that views Brexit almost entirely through the prism of FOM/immigration because that's what people told her was important. Now she's negotiated a deal that concentrated on FOM, people are finding other things they want.
This is what Brexit looks like in the real world. If it's not what you thought was being promised, you might want to look at the people who were making those promises, starting with the guy who didn't know Dover-Calais was important to trade, and the guy who wants no deal and then further negotiations during the transition period that only exists if there's been a deal.
If so could possibly give May some room for further negotiation if Barnier cannot hold his side together first
Spain can't actually veto the deal from the EU side
This bit is QMV right?
Yup, thanks to the wisdom of Gordon Brown and the Lisbon Treaty.
Wasn't it Mrs Thatchers Single European Act that brought in QMV?
Nope. QMV was part of the EU voting system from right back at its foundation. The biggest change was the Lisbon Treaty which brought in the current Double Majority system (to pass a proposal needs 55% of the countries and 65% of the EU population). In effect this means if you are smaller countries you can only block proposals if you have 11 or more countries objecting (out of 27)
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
If it fails it won't be peaceful.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
If it fails it won't be peaceful.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
If it fails it won't be peaceful.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
Some of them think ratifying the withdrawal agreement and leaving the EU is abandoning Brexit so these people can’t be reasoned with.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
Are you saying that referenda are not democratic, so their results should be ignored?
If so could possibly give May some room for further negotiation if Barnier cannot hold his side together first
Spain can't actually veto the deal from the EU side
This bit is QMV right?
Yup, thanks to the wisdom of Gordon Brown and the Lisbon Treaty.
Wasn't it Mrs Thatchers Single European Act that brought in QMV?
Nope. QMV was part of the EU voting system from right back at its foundation. The biggest change was the Lisbon Treaty which brought in the current Double Majority system (to pass a proposal needs 55% of the countries and 65% of the EU population). In effect this means if you are smaller countries you can only block proposals if you have 11 or more countries objecting (out of 27)
Nice was the first major change to voting. Between when we joined to Nice, QMV required over (1973) 80% to just under 80% (pre-Nice) of votes. Lisbon of course dramatically increased the number of areas subject to QMV and reduced the threshold to pass QMV but was just a 'tidying-up exercise'.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
Are you saying that referenda are not democratic, so their results should be ignored?
No their results should be implemented. The problem will be if the last referendum's results aren't implemented. I for one have no problem with a party being elected on a pledge to hold a new referendum AFTER we have left.
In 1955 Sweden held a referendum on switching to drive on the right hand side of the road. Until then, cars had driven on the left, which curiously was also the side that drivers sat on. No Change won by 83% to 15% (2% of ballots were blank), as an overwhelming majority of voters expressed a preference for drivers to sit as near as they could to the kerb, which is of course idiotic. In 1963 the Swedish parliament discarded the result and approved the change. As far as I know no pitchforks came out. Not sure how they handled the publicity though, or whether any parties whinged about the disregard shown for people's rule democracy.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
@AlastairMeeks - great thread header, thanks! I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain. In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
If it fails it won't be peaceful.
If it fails it will be given a democratic sendoff in a referendum.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
But are you, Mr Tyndall, not being utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building up at the moment against the politicians who are in the process of sacrificing our hard-won rights and freedoms, and putting us at the mercy of the corrupt Trump regime? And doing that only because destroying our economy helps them to become even more wealthy and powerful than they are at the moment?
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
It would be their only plausible way, at that point, to try to stop what was happening. The risky part is it assumes that after we started on the no deal route there would be enough sane Tory MPs who would then pull back in the absence of emergency legislation rather than press on regardless.
In 1955 Sweden held a referendum on switching to drive on the right hand side of the road. Until then, cars had driven on the left, which curiously was also the side that drivers sat on. No Change won by 83% to 15% (2% of ballots were blank), as an overwhelming majority of voters expressed a preference for drivers to sit as near as they could to the kerb, which is of course idiotic. In 1963 the Swedish parliament discarded the result and approved the change. As far as I know no pitchforks came out. Not sure how they handled the publicity though, or whether any parties whinged about the disregard shown for people's rule democracy.
There is a picture here on Stockholm on the day Sweden moved to driving on the right. Seems not everyone was compliant.
I blame Napoleon - pretty much everyone drove on the correct side until he interfered and forced continental Europe to comply. And then the US followed to spite Britain after the 1812 war!
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
The DUP have actually read the FTPA. They can remove the Theresa May administration via VoNC then the very next moment say they will support an alternative Tory PM. The law then gives the Tories 14 days to win a confidence vote without a GE. In short the FTPA makes VoNC less Nuclear and therefore more usable. A handful of Tories with rock solid local bases who are undeselectable might join them.
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
Although they’re not saying it out loud, based on the DUP’s reddest red line, the only outcome that could satisfy them is no Brexit.
Interesting intervention from Hunt today. Publicly supporting May against the plotters by pointing out the chaos removing her would unleash. Thus appearing loyal while actually causing another process story in leadership not selling her deal and framing her positively only against chaos. Today was Day 6 in the deal's media grid. He knew what he was doing.
In 1955 Sweden held a referendum on switching to drive on the right hand side of the road. Until then, cars had driven on the left, which curiously was also the side that drivers sat on. No Change won by 83% to 15% (2% of ballots were blank), as an overwhelming majority of voters expressed a preference for drivers to sit as near as they could to the kerb, which is of course idiotic. In 1963 the Swedish parliament discarded the result and approved the change. As far as I know no pitchforks came out. Not sure how they handled the publicity though, or whether any parties whinged about the disregard shown for people's rule democracy.
There is a picture here on Stockholm on the day Sweden moved to driving on the right. Seems not everyone was compliant.
I blame Napoleon - pretty much everyone drove on the correct side until he interfered and forced continental Europe to comply. And then the US followed to spite Britain after the 1812 war!
Pretty sure that photo was staged for the press. In actual fact the changeover was done in the early hours of the morning with all but emergency traffic banned while the last changes to road markings and signage etc were made.
In 1955 Sweden held a referendum on switching to drive on the right hand side of the road. Until then, cars had driven on the left, which curiously was also the side that drivers sat on. No Change won by 83% to 15% (2% of ballots were blank), as an overwhelming majority of voters expressed a preference for drivers to sit as near as they could to the kerb, which is of course idiotic. In 1963 the Swedish parliament discarded the result and approved the change. As far as I know no pitchforks came out. Not sure how they handled the publicity though, or whether any parties whinged about the disregard shown for people's rule democracy.
There is a picture here on Stockholm on the day Sweden moved to driving on the right. Seems not everyone was compliant.
I blame Napoleon - pretty much everyone drove on the correct side until he interfered and forced continental Europe to comply. And then the US followed to spite Britain after the 1812 war!
Pretty sure the Americans had adopted the right-hand side before then. The US drives on the right because teamsters sat on the rearmost left-hand horse so they could control the whole team with the whip in their right hand, and so would find it easier to judge clearance by passing to the right.
I don't think today's Spain/Gibraltar thing is significant. They are just asking for what they got on the WA for the end state. They'll get it. More worryingly for May are the multiple noises from big states they are uneasy on Fish and Level Playing fields. At the very least it boxes May in because if she tries to reopen the text she knows that will be a two way street. At worst you have to ask whether she will now come back from EUCO with a first amused text even tougher than the current draft. Anyone who thinks the EU wouldn't dare inflame parliament further hasn't been watching closely. They know the game is up and may well take their advantage further.
For the sake of the country, I really, really hope this isn't an accurate account of Labour's thinking, although I fear it is:
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
Labour's intent is pretty clear and consistent with Theresa May's middle option when she warned: "We can choose to leave with no deal, we can risk no Brexit at all, or we can choose to unite and support the best deal that can be negotiated". Or is the Prime Minister also a lying toad? Labour believes, as Jeremy Corbyn told the CBI, that the government and EU would reopen negotiations for a last minute deal. Of course, he hopes it will by then be a Labour government.
ETA: AM's header also posits a last-minute return to action.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Again it will be neither democratic nor peaceful. You are utterly blind to the resentment and hatred that is building at the moment against the politicians because of the suspicion that they are planning to abandon Brexit.
We know all about the resentment and hatred, Leave enthusiasts already killed an MP.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Comments
On Gibraltar Spain wants matters to be negotiated largely outside the EU with Britain
Then we had the referendum and voted to leave but Theresa May has come up with a deal that gives no end date on leaving the customs union and gives the final say on whether we can be allowed to leave the customs union to the EU (who are openly set on destroying the country by making us give up Northern Ireland if we ever want to truly leave)
So we're never actually going to leave and the referendum result has basically been overturned.
LBJ said that the first rule of politics was to be able to count.
I think historians will write up Brexit as a peaceful failed revolution. While the status quo did not enjoy majority support, the revolutionaries failed to secure control of the executive and the legislature. Ultimately, the divide between the ‘clean slate’ and ‘trade off’ Brexiteers was ultimately unbridgeable, leading to a second referendum and a vote to Remain.
In a broader sense, the referenda and crises of 2010-2022 can be seen as the consequence of Blair’s botched constitutional and European reforms. The status quo will hold, but only after severe testing.
May is going to lose by miles anyway.
The only reason could be that Mourdant wants to stay in her job and still vote against.
Talk about keeping your cushy office car and driver...
When Corbyn becomes Prime Minister we may find another revolution of a very different kind starts to take place...
Well - we keep telling you he needs us to leave....
Of course his party are completely in tune with his views.....
This deserves a repost...
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1063467645822005251
And people like you will help bring it about, out of spite.
I did half-wonder whether the misquotation, if so it be, originates with George Osborne, who has a Thing for LBJ. I can imagine Osborne saying something in conversation about Johnson's formidable vote-counting skills that was misconstrued by someone party to the conversation as a quotable quote by the great man. Might be a slightly fanciful guess at the identification, but there aren't that many people in British politics in recent years (when the "being able to count" quote seems to have originated) with such an interest in US politics in general and LBJ in particular.
This sort of thing was apparently abolished in this country about 150 years ago:
"We progressives hail opportunity, egalitarianism and diversity. Yet here’s our dirty little secret: Some of our most liberal bastions in America rely on a system of inherited privilege that benefits rich whites at the expense of almost everyone else.
I’m talking about “legacy preferences” that elite universities give to children of graduates. These universities constitute some of the world’s greatest public goods, but they rig admissions to favor applicants who already have had every privilege in life."
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/27/opinion/sunday/legacy-college-admissions-harvard.html
Soon be time to invest in a bread maker?
I'm not calling her a bad person for trying to do so - I am sure she means well, and I imagine she's been scared shitless by countless intelligence briefings about how life jettisoned from the EU will be some sort of terrorist wasteland, which have found fertile ground in her naturally statist and somewhat authoritarian mindset. She no doubt thinks she's doing the right thing, in the midst of doing something that is in actuality, exceptionally damaging.
It will fail though. She and the people on her side really do have failure written through them like Blackpool rock - it's inescapable that their fears will come to pass. We will Brexit, and the country will succeed outside the EU. How that happens, I have no idea, but I'm looking forward to seeing.
Ryan Fry, who won gold for Canada at the 2014 Winter Olympics, and team mates Jamie Koe, Chris Schille, and DJ Kidby forfeited their final game after fans and opponents complained.
The group reportedly broke brooms and damaged locker rooms.
Who would have thought a curling tournament could be wilder than a night out in Essex
Get them young.
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnson
I must have blinked.
Acting like she is some mastermind, and so presumably wanted to appear as deal as she has for so long, stretches credibility.
To make 'Brexiting' work well, and be seen to be working well, and worse, leave the EU looking weak and perhaps on the brink of collapse, if you think about it, would have been inconceivable to someone that invested in supporting the status quo.
1. She thought the EU would be more desperate to accomodate the UK than they have been.
2. She failed to realise the damage a No Deal Brexit would have on the UK's other trading relationships.
3. She thought that (the newly loyal) Dr Fox would do a better job of at least replicating the EU's existing relationships.
And then there's Northern Ireland
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6405099/Tory-Eurosceptics-claim-force-no-confidence-vote-two-days.html
Just like his lot lied to the British people during the referendum.
Oh dear.
Labour believes a majority of MPs would not support a no deal, and that any rejection of May’s final deal by a combination of angry hard Brexiters and opposition parties would lead to chaotic and unstable situation.
In theory, if May’s deal were to be rejected, the UK would head out of the EU on World Trade Organization terms, after MPs voted in principle to quit when the European Union Withdrawal Act was passed.
But the party believes ministers would have to prepare emergency legislation in dozens of areas before the end of March, giving MPs a chance to block an immediate exit. “If Theresa May’s deal fails to command the support of parliament, then we will not stand back and allow her to take this country off a cliff,” Starmer said.
I mean, I know they are cynical lying toads, but surely even the most cynical of lying toads would see that this doesn't actually work - blocking emergency legislation in that scenario wouldn't prevent us leaving the EU, it would just make leaving the EU even more chaotic and destructive than it would be if we left without a deal but at least with some legislative cover.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/19/labour-theresa-may-no-confidence-vote-brexit-deal-voted-down
I fear I may harp on about this frequently over the coming months: many MPs are stupid or mendacious or isolated from reality and there are enough of them to fuck things up.
"ENOUGH of this blatant propaganda, DM. Traitor May has lied to her voters and destroyed democracy in this country. She's got to go."
and
"What has happened to the DM? Why has it suddenly morphed into the Guardian? The Guardian is an impoverished sinking ship, is that the publisher's intention for the DM, too? Because if its editorial continues in this vein, that's exactly what's going to happen."
There really isn't much room to manouevre if you want to keep the Irish border open and restrict freedom of movement. May has come up with a "Home Office" Brexit - one that views Brexit almost entirely through the prism of FOM/immigration because that's what people told her was important. Now she's negotiated a deal that concentrated on FOM, people are finding other things they want.
This is what Brexit looks like in the real world. If it's not what you thought was being promised, you might want to look at the people who were making those promises, starting with the guy who didn't know Dover-Calais was important to trade, and the guy who wants no deal and then further negotiations during the transition period that only exists if there's been a deal.
What a great time to be alive. If you're an Anarchist.
http://realscandinavia.com/files/2014/09/kungsgatan1967.jpg
I blame Napoleon - pretty much everyone drove on the correct side until he interfered and forced continental Europe to comply. And then the US followed to spite Britain after the 1812 war!
Of course tonight's moves are about ensuring it doesn't get that far. If they can create a sense of inevitability about it Tory MPs might do it for them.
ETA: AM's header also posits a last-minute return to action.
What we're not seeing is a practical outcome that you won't just build a bigger betrayal narrative on top of. It's worse now than if it had never been fed concessions, and the more we feed it the bigger it will get.
Wow.