I'm more than somewhat dismayed at the prospect of an anti-Jewish Labour government, but it will be interesting to see how communism works out in this day & age and in this country.
I think we've got to let Corbyn clear out the establishment in order to build something better after his done his worst...
Surely you joke?
No. The establishment is out of control and purely in it for themselves. The country needs once in a century shake up.
The people tried to do it with Brexit but that decision is in the process of being overturned.
The only thing left to bring the establishment to their knees is a Corbyn government...
You need to differentiate between the metropolitan elite and the establishment
The Brexiteers are from the heart of the establishment, except the Russians of course!
Not all of the establishment - Northumberland, Cumbria, Salop, Warwick, Wakefield, Norfolk, Devon and Somerset certainly
Talking to family this evening, some previously hardcore leaver relatives seem to have thrown in the towel and have switched to "what's the point... we might as well remain"; no real anger more resignation. Interesting to see where opinion polls move - or not - over coming days
I agree. Outside political circles Brexit is a massive yawn and people just want it to go away. The chances that there will be a massive backlash if we end up with BRINO or remain are wildly overstated, mostly by people who spent their entire lives obsessing about the EU and think that everyone else has done the same. But they haven't.
There will undoubtedly be a huge backlash if there is no Brexit.
I’m starting to doubt that. I think most normal people (I.e. not PBers) are bored to tears with it, past caring.
Your definition of normal and mine and the circles in which we mix will be very different then.
My experience is that, yeshen there's still a fight to be had.
I agree with what you say about Remainers. That is why there will be a backlash particularly when we stay in the CFP and EU immigration ramps up again. That’s before we get to the point the rebate disappears.
Why would the rebate disappear?
Equally immigration is only a problem because are benefits system is means based rather than contribution based. Blair and Brown were told they would need to change it in 2004 but they didn't listen...
That is not really true, Italy has a contribution based benefits system as does the USA and Lega Nord is on over 30% on an anti immigration ticket and Trump is US president on the same platform
The issue in Italy is non-EU immigration, from across the Med and from the Balkans. EU migrants are uncontroversial in comparison, including the large Romanian diaspora.
Indeed if you ask Mr "Tommy Robinson" here, you might well find the same.
If North African and Middle Eastern migrants get to Italy and France then it gets easier to come to the UK through the Tunnel or by ferry
Yes, and we should support our EU cousins in reducing the numbers.
Something that they have done fairly effectively, albeit with some tactics that are best seen at a distance such as in the Sahel.
The numbers are now sharply down, to the level of a decade ago
This is a government falling to pieces in front of our eyes.
That has been the case for months, yet still the Tories level with Labour in the polls and May leads Corbyn as best PM
Something is going to give at some point. Even if you want to vote Tory how would you even know what you might be voting for if there were an election? Labour's Brexit policy is a deliberately vague contradiction, but at least I know it, the Tories could be backing anything by next week when May goes, and even then hundreds of them will be supporting some other thing, who knows what any candidates might think.
It won't as most Tory voters would vote for them over Corbyn even if Tory MPs were machinegunning each other in the Commons whether that have agreed on anything or not
I think quite a lot of Tory voters would simply abstain at the moment. The party is driving itself into the ground and appears incapable of running the country in any coherent fashion, good or bad. Tory voters will be deeply sceptical of Corbyn, but Labour has managed to look reasonably coherent for the last year and both McDonnell and Starmer are clearly competent. You can't beat something with nothing, and I think a fair number of voters will shrug and say "OK, let them have a go while the Tories sort themselves out".
If the Labour party were led by anyone vaguely sensible, yes. As long as it's led by a terrorist-supporting, Britain-hating hard-left extremist, not so much. Up to you guys.
I don't mind the Norway option much - it works well enough for Norway! Thanks to Andy Cooke for his handy
There are at least 80 Tory MPs who are staunch Brexiteers, if they get behind Boris they alone will ensure he gets to the final 2
He looked a defeated man tonight with zest gone and under attack from fellow conservatives
Game over and even he knows it.
If he was even given a chance there would be defections. He is over
Far from it, game is only just beginning.
Of course he is not going to be happy he is not getting pure Brexit, all the better for him to lead the Brexiteer backlash
It is over for him in the conservative party, maybe he can lead UKIP with Farage
It isn't, if he gets to the membership Boris will likely win the Tory leadership
And lose a lot of his mps. They will not serve with him
With Corbyn as Labour leader and Boris as Tory leader you may end up with a scenario where both the Tory and Labour leaders are elected by the membership despite the misgivings of large numbers of backbenchers, so be it
Johnson has no chance at all
Of course he does, he only needs about 80 MPs to get to the final two then he almost certainly wins the membership
Over 100MPs required to guarantee a place in the final 2
Nope, Leadsom got 84 MPs in 2016 and got to the final two
So? That's because May got way more than she needed. I said "guarantee" ie. get in the final two regardless of other candidates colluding to keep him out (as happened to keep Portillo off the ballot in 2001).
Portillo did not have the support of the right as Boris would but got squeezed between IDS and Clarke
IDS lent Clarke votes. Anyway that's missing the point. You said he needs 80 votes. I pointed out that he needs 100+ to guarantee a place. That is just a mathematical fact.
120 Tory MPs voted Leave even then but as I said he could easily get to the final two with just 80
It was deemed a no go prior to the referendum and dismissed out of hand by the EU and EFTA countries (UK too big for what is in effect a subsidiary and subservient adjunct to the EU).
Plus the emergency brake would very likely not apply or be able to be applied to the UK (what emergency?).
It certainly wasn't dismissed out of hand by the EFTA countries. The current Norwegian Government is certainly very, very pro EU and was happy to try and derail Britain voting for Brexit but both the Norwegian opposition - which regularly ends up in Government - and the Icelandic Government were very much in favour of the UK rejoining EFTA.
He’ll have zero credibility, even if he still has any, if that’s true. He’ll be lampooned as a bigger buffoon than Boris if that’s true, and rightly so.
If JRM votes for the deal, as leader of ERG many of that group would to.
That is why I am sceptical
The ERG proved a busted flush when it came to replacing May. Even with their support,the deal wont pass - not with the DUP voting against it.
It would if 20 to 40 Labour MPs did
Even Santa Claus can’t come up that number though who will.
If the alternative to May's Deal is Norway plus Customs Union and free movement many Labour MPs in Leave seats could switch to May's Deal
Worth their careers?
Well their careers may well be ended if by refusing to back May's Deal they end up with a free movement deal which could lose them their heavily Leave seats yes
He’ll have zero credibility, even if he still has any, if that’s true. He’ll be lampooned as a bigger buffoon than Boris if that’s true, and rightly so.
If JRM votes for the deal, as leader of ERG many of that group would to.
That is why I am sceptical
The ERG proved a busted flush when it came to replacing May. Even with their support,the deal wont pass - not with the DUP voting against it.
It would if 20 to 40 Labour MPs did
Even Santa Claus can’t come up that number though who will.
If the alternative to May's Deal is Norway plus Customs Union and free movement many Labour MPs in Leave seats could switch to May's Deal
It’s nice to dream but until May goes there is no alternative to her deal.
No, it's based on seeing if they actually want Brexit as much as they say they do, which I don't think many do. They only want perfect Brexit and would be happy with no brexit, so they can moan.
Liked May’s line to parliament that the outcome has to satisfy the 52% who voted Leave as well as the 48% who voted Remain. That all this is corrosive to our politics and that all progress is built on compromise.
She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
As has been pointed out to death, while the Brexiteers being against will condemn the deal to a massive defeat, they are not enough on their own to see it through even if they change their minds. Labour and the Tory remainers are also needed in some numbers, and they are now working for remain above all else.
I don't know - a lot of Labour MPs still have to look to their constituencies if it looks like their votes could be influential on whether we leave or stay. A Tory Party (sans a few remainers) rowing in behind the deal as the only do-able form of Brexit could even take that to the country in a GE.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
No. And few Labour MPs are going to want to risk being blamed for the ensuring the survival of May's government - that would indeed be career-ending.
The Tories quickly fall if the deal is passed, they stay in power if it is scuppered.
It was deemed a no go prior to the referendum and dismissed out of hand by the EU and EFTA countries (UK too big for what is in effect a subsidiary and subservient adjunct to the EU).
Plus the emergency brake would very likely not apply or be able to be applied to the UK (what emergency?).
It certainly wasn't dismissed out of hand by the EFTA countries. The current Norwegian Government is certainly very, very pro EU and was happy to try and derail Britain voting for Brexit but both the Norwegian opposition - which regularly ends up in Government - and the Icelandic Government were very much in favour of the UK rejoining EFTA.
But it requires the Customs Union too as the backstop
This is a government falling to pieces in front of our eyes.
That has been the case for months, yet still the Tories level with Labour in the polls and May leads Corbyn as best PM
Something is going to give at some point. Even if you want to vote Tory how would you even know what you might be voting for if there were an election? Labour's Brexit policy is a deliberately vague contradiction, but at least I know it, the Tories could be backing anything by next week when May goes, and even then hundreds of them will be supporting some other thing, who knows what any candidates might think.
It won't as most Tory voters would vote for them over Corbyn even if Tory MPs were machinegunning each other in the Commons whether that have agreed on anything or not
I think quite a lot of Tory voters would simply abstain at the moment. The party is driving itself into the ground and appears incapable of running the country in any coherent fashion, good or bad. Tory voters will be deeply sceptical of Corbyn, but Labour has managed to look reasonably coherent for the last year and both McDonnell and Starmer are clearly competent. You can't beat something with nothing, and I think a fair number of voters will shrug and say "OK, let them have a go while the Tories sort themselves out".
If the Labour party were led by anyone vaguely sensible, yes. As long as it's led by a terrorist-supporting, Britain-hating hard-left extremist, not so much. Up to you guys.
Reasonably coherent.. yeahhhh right .. esp about jews....
Talking to family this evening, some previously hardcore leaver relatives seem to have thrown in the towel and have switched to "what's the point... we might as well remain"; no real anger more resignation. Interesting to see where opinion polls move - or not - over coming days
I agree. Outside political circles Brexit is a massive yawn and people just want it to go ey haven't.
There will undoubtedly be a huge backlash if there is no Brexit.
I’m starting to doubt that. I think most normal people (I.e. not PBers) are bored to tears with it, past caring.
Your definition of normal and mine and the circles in which we mix will be very different then.
My experience is that, yeshen there's still a fight to be had.
I agree with what you say about Remainers. That is why there will be a backlash particularly when we stay in the CFP and EU immigration ramps up again. That’s before we get to the point the rebate disappears.
Why would the rebate disappear?
Equally immigration is only a problem because are benefits system is means based rather than contribution based. Blair and Brown were told they would need to change it in 2004 but they didn't listen...
That is not really true, Italy has a contribution based benefits system as does the USA and Lega Nord is on over 30% on an anti immigration ticket and Trump is US president on the same platform
The issue in Italy is non-EU immigration, from across the Med and from the Balkans. EU migrants are uncontroversial in comparison, including the large Romanian diaspora.
Indeed if you ask Mr "Tommy Robinson" here, you might well find the same.
If North African and Middle Eastern migrants get to Italy and France then it gets easier to come to the UK through the Tunnel or by ferry
Yes, and we should support our EU cousins in reducing the numbers.
Something that they have done fairly effectively, albeit with some tactics that are best seen at a distance such as in the Sahel.
The numbers are now sharply down, to the level of a decade ago
Yet concerns have not gone away, Lega Nord now comfortably leads Italian polls and the populist anti immigration Vox has just entered the Andalucian Parliament
Talking to family this evening, some previously hardcore leaver relatives seem to have thrown in the towel and have switched to "what's the point... we might as well remain"; no real anger more resignation. Interesting to see where opinion polls move - or not - over coming days
I agree. Outside political circles Brexit is a massive yawn and people just want it to go away. The chances that there will be a massive backlash if we end up with BRINO or remain are wildly overstated, mostly by people who spent their entire lives obsessing about the EU and think that everyone else has done the same. But they haven't.
There will undoubtedly be a huge backlash if there is no Brexit.
I’m starting to doubt that. I think most normal people (I.e. not PBers) are bored to tears with it, past caring.
Your definition of normal and mine and the circles in which we mix will be very different then.
My experience is that, yes, people are bored to tears and frustrated with it, and one might assume past caring, but ask them direct and suddenly people will become intense about it again. And that is true of remainers and leavers. Leavers are more desperate right now because they can see it all slipping away, but remainers are getting a little triumphant a bit early as well, when there's still a fight to be had.
I agree with what you say about Remainers. That is why there will be a backlash particularly when we stay in the CFP and EU immigration ramps up again. That’s before we get to the point the rebate disappears.
Why would the rebate disappear?
Equally immigration is only a problem because are benefits system is means based rather than contribution based. Blair and Brown were told they would need to change it in 2004 but they didn't listen...
That's not true. An influx of unskilled labour undermines working class pay and conditions even if they don't claim benefits.
If Tories really cared about the low pay of the Working classes, they wouldn't have been screwing them for years.
I would trust the late Bob Crowe on the issue, not JRM or Boris.
By lighting the national minimum wage and the personal allowance
If Tories really cared about the low pay of the Working classes, they wouldn't have been screwing them for years.
I would trust the late Bob Crowe on the issue, not JRM or Boris.
If anyone wants to see how awful a negotiator Boris actually was, just take a look at the huuge deals TFL (Crow) managed to get out of him whilst he was Mayor.
'I doubt you will find a better offer than this anywhere else in the public sector,' said union boss Bob Crow
In fairness, Crow was one of the most awesome negotiators in living memory. Boris had no chance against him. A true giant of the trade union movement - I almost never agreed with him, but no-one could doubt his skills. We will probably never see his like again.
Nigel Dodds is very eloquent and well spoken at the moment and entirely reasonable.
If it wasn't for this one disastrous compromise there would be no reason not to accept the deal. But this is not reasonable to accept.
That's fine for anyone who is happy to accept remain or no deal as alternatives. In fairness many do. But that will be a choice those MPs who reject it will have to accept, so while it is a free country and they can moan afterwards, and excoriate May for what she brought back, the MPs will not get much sympathy from me - after all, they will have positively decided not to back it and accept the possibility of remain/no deal as a result, believing that to be the best choice. That's a tough and honourable position, accepting remaining rather than a disastrous compromise, so no need for them to cry like babies afterwards for making the right call.
Let's not have them see it as losing proper Brexit, and more a victory in avoiding terrible Brexit.
Even though they'll look ridiculous, if Leavers in the HoC DO all suddenly about face and row in behind May's deal (even if it is narrowly defeated) it does change the dynamic significantly. Because the remainers currently in the ascendancy have the protection that the Leavers as much as themselves are arguing the deal doesn't respect the referendum and Remaining is better than no deal.
If all Leavers get behind the deal the position in the Country changes (and indeed the Conservative Party would have largely reunited)
It was deemed a no go prior to the referendum and dismissed out of hand by the EU and EFTA countries (UK too big for what is in effect a subsidiary and subservient adjunct to the EU).
Plus the emergency brake would very likely not apply or be able to be applied to the UK (what emergency?).
It certainly wasn't dismissed out of hand by the EFTA countries. The current Norwegian Government is certainly very, very pro EU and was happy to try and derail Britain voting for Brexit but both the Norwegian opposition - which regularly ends up in Government - and the Icelandic Government were very much in favour of the UK rejoining EFTA.
But it requires the Customs Union too as the backstop
Yep and that is what will kill it. The backstop is ridiculous and unnecessary but it is there in the deal. Until we get a Government back in Dublin who is willing to engage as Enda Kenny was then this issue will not be resolved.
But on the point I was simply answering Topping's incorrect assertion that the EFTA countries dismissed it out of hand. They didn't. Two stayed silent, one was strongly in favour and one was sceptical.
If Tories really cared about the low pay of the Working classes, they wouldn't have been screwing them for years.
I would trust the late Bob Crowe on the issue, not JRM or Boris.
If anyone wants to see how awful a negotiator Boris actually was, just take a look at the huuge deals TFL (Crow) managed to get out of him whilst he was Mayor.
'I doubt you will find a better offer than this anywhere else in the public sector,' said union boss Bob Crow
In fairness, Crow was one of the most awesome negotiators in living memory. Boris had no chance against him. A true giant of the trade union movement - I almost never agreed with him, but no-one could doubt his skills. We will probably never see his like again.
Barnier/the EU are/were just as tough I think. Boris would fold like a cheap suit.
No, it's based on seeing if they actually want Brexit as much as they say they do, which I don't think many do. They only want perfect Brexit and would be happy with no brexit, so they can moan.
Liked Ma She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
I don't know - a lot of Labour MPs still have to look to their constituencies if it looks like their votes could be influential on whether we leave or stay. A Tory Party (sans a few remainers) rowing in behind the deal as the only do-able form of Brexit could even take that to the country in a GE.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
No. And few Labour MPs are going to want to risk being blamed for the ensuring the survival of May's government - that would indeed be career-ending.
The Tories quickly fall if the deal is passed, they stay in power if it is scuppered.
That is the almost amusing thing about this. Ok nothing is certain in life, but even if the Tories hold together after a deal is somehow passed, the DUP do not look like they are bluffing, so a Labour MP doing the right thing (if they believe the deal is indeed the best option before us) should not worry about it causing the government to survive for very long. It would be an unstable minority government with more than 3 years to go - would that seriously last the distance?
No, it's based on seeing if they actually want Brexit as much as they say they do, which I don't think many do. They only want perfect Brexit and would be happy with no brexit, so they can moan.
Liked May’s line to parliament that the outcome has to satisfy the 52% who voted Leave as well as the 48% who voted Remain. That all this is corrosive to our politics and that all progress is built on compromise.
She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
As has been pointed out to death, while the Brexiteers being against will condemn the deal to a massive defeat, they are not enough on their own to see it through even if they change their minds. Labour and the Tory remainers are also needed in some numbers, and they are now working for remain above all else.
I don't know - a lot of Labour MPs still have to look to their constituencies if it looks like their votes could be influential on whether we leave or stay. A Tory Party (sans a few remainers) rowing in behind the deal as the only do-able form of Brexit could even take that to the country in a GE.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
More people voted for Brexit than have voted for any party since World War Two as indeed did people voting Remain. Immigration is driving the populist right across the West, they are only being kept down in the UK because the government promises to end free movement
Liked May’s line to parliament that the outcome has to satisfy the 52% who voted Leave as well as the 48% who voted Remain. That all this is corrosive to our politics and that all progress is built on compromise.
She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
As has been pointed out to death, while the Brexiteers being against will condemn the deal to a massive defeat, they are not enough on their own to see it through even if they change their minds. Labour and the Tory remainers are also needed in some numbers, and they are now working for remain above all else.
I don't know - a lot of Labour MPs still have to look to their constituencies if it looks like their votes could be influential on whether we leave or stay. A Tory Party (sans a few remainers) rowing in behind the deal as the only do-able form of Brexit could even take that to the country in a GE.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
No. And few Labour MPs are going to want to risk being blamed for the ensuring the survival of May's government - that would indeed be career-ending.
The Tories quickly fall if the deal is passed, they stay in power if it is scuppered.
Yes, I have thought that for a week or so now. The DUP will stop supporting the government if May's Deal is passed - I would have thought Labour's best chance of winning a VoNC is to see the MV passed. Surprised they do not appear to have clocked that yet.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
Perhaps the Tories went about the deal with the Unionists the wrong way. Rather than bribes, maybe they should have said that if the DUP didn't provide support then the Government would decide it was time for a vote on reunification as set out in the GFA.
He’ll have zero credibility, even if he still has any, if that’s true. He’ll be lampooned as a bigger buffoon than Boris if that’s true, and rightly so.
If JRM votes for the deal, as leader of ERG many of that group would to.
That is why I am sceptical
The ERG proved a busted flush when it came to replacing May. Even with their support,the deal wont pass - not with the DUP voting against it.
It would if 20 to 40 Labour MPs did
Even Santa Claus can’t come up that number though who will.
If the alternative to May's Deal is Norway plus Customs Union and free movement many Labour MPs in Leave seats could switch to May's Deal
It’s nice to dream but until May goes there is no alternative to her deal.
There is NO alternative to May's Deal bar BINO/Remain or No Deal, the first sees a far right surge, the second economic disaster. End of conversation
Evidence - especially given that we could veto the entire budget.
Our veto will rapidly become worthless in almost all areas. It was worth listening to Daniela Schwarzer on PM last night. She is the Director of the German Council on Foreign Relations and was commenting on the issues with Italy. She said exactly what I have been saying for years now. The only way that the Eurozone and the EU in general can survive in the long term is with a hugely increased integration programme and what she called 'finishing the Eurozone project'. That means political and economic integration including the raising of EU taxation and EU control of economic policy.
Britain can only ever be a barrier to that. That is why they will either have to force our veto off us or force us out of the EU. Far better that we are out now so they can get on with their integration project because we sure as hell can't stop it.
That is precisely why Cameron's renegotiation agreement was so important. He'd managed to get the EU to agree that the EU treaties did not give them carte blanche to establish Eurozone hegemony. We had the best of both worlds, now alas thrown away.
He’ll have zero credibility, even if he still has any, if that’s true. He’ll be lampooned as a bigger buffoon than Boris if that’s true, and rightly so.
If JRM votes for the deal, as leader of ERG many of that group would to.
That is why I am sceptical
The ERG proved a busted flush when it came to replacing May. Even with their support,the deal wont pass - not with the DUP voting against it.
It would if 20 to 40 Labour MPs did
Even Santa Claus can’t come up that number though who will.
If the alternative to May's Deal is Norway plus Customs Union and free movement many Labour MPs in Leave seats could switch to May's Deal
It’s nice to dream but until May goes there is no alternative to her deal.
There is NO alternative to May's Deal bar BINO or No Deal, the first sees a far right surge, the second economic disaster. End of conversation
Perhaps the Tories went about the deal with the Unionists the wrong way. Rather than bribes, maybe they should have said that if the DUP didn't provide support then the Government would decide it was time for a vote on reunification as set out in the GFA.
Perhaps the Tories went about the deal with the Unionists the wrong way. Rather than bribes, maybe they should have said that if the DUP didn't provide support then the Government would decide it was time for a vote on reunification as set out in the GFA.
The Tory backbenchers would not have accepted that, such a threat would have had no credibility.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
Well technically speaking it can be, entirely legally; we never lived in a democracy where a referendum result had to be implemented. The question is should they be ignored, and, if the will of the people changes, how often is reasonable enough to stop or revisit something as a result (if we remain and a year later there is a swing to leave, will remainers say it is time for another vote? Don't make me laugh)
If Tories really cared about the low pay of the Working classes, they wouldn't have been screwing them for years.
I would trust the late Bob Crowe on the issue, not JRM or Boris.
If anyone wants to see how awful a negotiator Boris actually was, just take a look at the huuge deals TFL (Crow) managed to get out of him whilst he was Mayor.
'I doubt you will find a better offer than this anywhere else in the public sector,' said union boss Bob Crow
In fairness, Crow was one of the most awesome negotiators in living memory. Boris had no chance against him. A true giant of the trade union movement - I almost never agreed with him, but no-one could doubt his skills. We will probably never see his like again.
Barnier/the EU are/were just as tough I think. Boris would fold like a cheap suit.
I’d give Crow the edge over Barnier partly because Crow was more physically imposing. Both are/were seriously tough opponents. And agreed about Boris, a Pygmy compared to either of them.
Sad about the early death Bob Crow - he was the man we loved to hate - but he added a great deal to British political life. To his credit, Boris gave a gracious testimony to him on his passing.
No, it's based on seeing if they actually want Brexit as much as they say they do, which I don't think many do. They only want perfect Brexit and would be happy with no brexit, so they can moan.
Liked May’s line to parliament that the outcome has to satisfy the 52% who voted Leave as well as the 48% who voted Remain. That all this is corrosive to our politics and that all progress is built on compromise.
She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
As has been pointed out to death, while the Brexiteers being against will condemn the deal to a massive defeat, they are not enough on their own to see it through even if they change their minds. Labour and the Tory remainers are also needed in some numbers, and they are now working for remain above all else.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
More people voted for Brexit than have voted for any party since World War Two as indeed did people voting Remain. Immigration is driving the populist right across the West, they are only being kept down in the UK because the government promises to end free movement
But there was no great clamour for a vote outside UKIP and Tory Eurosceptic circles. People expressed an opinion because they were presented with the question following an extended period of intensive campaigning which included blatant scaremongering on both sides.
Of all the cretinosities of May's handling of Brexit, failing to keep the DUP on board was easily the most bafflingly, idiotically, self-destructively, incompetently unnecessary unforced error.
May decided to betray the DUP all on her lonesome. Nobody told her to do it. Barnier didn't make her do it. She just did it.
We tried to tell you it would end in tears, Mrs May.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
Well technically speaking it can be, entirely legally; we never lived in a democracy where a referendum result had to be implemented. The question is should they be ignored, and, if the will of the people changes, how often is reasonable enough to stop or revisit something as a result (if we remain and a year later there is a swing to leave, will remainers say it is time for another vote? Don't make me laugh)
No, it's based on seeing if they actually want Brexit as much as they say they do, which I don't think many do. They only want perfect Brexit and would be happy with no brexit, so they can moan.
Liked May’s line to parliament that the outcome has to satisfy the 52% who voted Leave as well as the 48% who voted Remain. That all this is corrosive to our politics and that all progress is built on compromise.
She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
As has been pointed out to death, while the Brexiteers being against will else.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
More people voted for Brexit than have voted for any party since World War Two as indeed did people voting Remain. Immigration is driving the populist right across the West, they are only being kept down in the UK because the government promises to end free movement
But there was no great clamour for a vote outside UKIP and Tory Eurosceptic circles. People expressed an opinion because they were presented with the question following an extended period of intensive campaigning which included blatant scaremongering on both sides.
More than enough voted for their one chance to cut immigration to ensure we get a resurgent continental style far right party if Brexit is not delivered and/or free movement left in place
No, it's based on seeing if they actually want Brexit as much as they say they do, which I don't think many do. They only want perfect Brexit and would be happy with no brexit, so they can moan.
Liked May’s line to parliament that the outcome has to satisfy the 52% who voted Leave as well as the 48% who voted Remain. That all this is corrosive to our politics and that all progress is built on compromise.
She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
As has been pointed out to death, while the Brexiteers being against will condemn the deal to a massive defeat, they are not enough on their own to see it through even if they change their minds. Labour and the Tory remainers are also needed in some numbers, and they are now working for remain above all else.
I don't know - a lot of Labour MPs still have to look to their constituencies if it looks like their votes could be influential on whether we leave or stay. A Tory Party (sans a few remainers) rowing in behind the deal as the only do-able form of Brexit could even take that to the country in a GE.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
Turning us into Venezuela will not endear Labour to the working class.
No, it's based on seeing if they actually want Brexit as much as they say they do, which I don't think many do. They only want perfect Brexit and would be happy with no brexit, so they can moan.
Liked May’s line to parliament that the outcome has to satisfy the 52% who voted Leave as well as the 48% who voted Remain. That all this is corrosive to our politics and that all progress is built on compromise.
She might have been bullied into it. The Citizens of Nowhere might now be, erm, nowhere. But she got there, eventually.
Agreed. She deserves much criticism, but she does actually at least seem to be trying to find something that might be acceptable to both the 48 and the 52. Most others are focusing only on what one side wants.
As has been pointed out to death, while the Brexiteers being against will condemn the deal to a massive defeat, they are not enough on their own to see it through even if they change their minds. Labour and the Tory remainers are also needed in some numbers, and they are now working for remain above all else.
I don't know - a lot of Labour MPs still have to look to their constituencies if it looks like their votes could be influential on whether we leave or stay. A Tory Party (sans a few remainers) rowing in behind the deal as the only do-able form of Brexit could even take that to the country in a GE.
I could still see a few Labour MPs abstaining tbh - especially those nursing small majorities in strong leave constituencies.
Brexit is not a salient issue - despite being important - particularly for Labour voters. Other issues will easily override it - and any votes at risk were probably lost in 2017.It may have some impact here and there on winning back white working class voters.
Turning us into Venezuela will not endear Labour to the working class.
No it wouldn't. Nor is it the remotest possibility.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
Indeed.
I never thought I would see Parliament treat it's citizens like this... I guess the expenses fiddling was a warning of the contempt this House Of Thieves has for it's voters but even after that I'm shocked at what's happening now...
Of all the cretinosities of May's handling of Brexit, failing to keep the DUP on board was easily the most bafflingly, idiotically, self-destructively, incompetently unnecessary unforced error.
May decided to betray the DUP all on her lonesome. Nobody told her to do it. Barnier didn't make her do it. She just did it.
We tried to tell you it would end in tears, Mrs May.
Keeping the DUP happy would have meant keeping all of GB included in EU rules for all GFA areas. You have been furious about the (small handful) of areas May already signed up to. The inconsistency of those opposing this deal is staggering.
It was deemed a no go prior to the referendum and dismissed out of hand by the EU and EFTA countries (UK too big for what is in effect a subsidiary and subservient adjunct to the EU).
Plus the emergency brake would very likely not apply or be able to be applied to the UK (what emergency?).
It certainly wasn't dismissed out of hand by the EFTA countries. The current Norwegian Government is certainly very, very pro EU and was happy to try and derail Britain voting for Brexit but both the Norwegian opposition - which regularly ends up in Government - and the Icelandic Government were very much in favour of the UK rejoining EFTA.
But it requires the Customs Union too as the backstop
Yep and that is what will kill it. The backstop is ridiculous and unnecessary but it is there in the deal. Until we get a Government back in Dublin who is willing to engage as Enda Kenny was then this issue will not be resolved.
But on the point I was simply answering Topping's incorrect assertion that the EFTA countries dismissed it out of hand. They didn't. Two stayed silent, one was strongly in favour and one was sceptical.
Tbf, we need the open border commitment to drive a necessity for the very comprehensive trade deal that we want: if we ever get to fleshing out the FFA. Realpolitik on the border with a more pragmatic Irish PM can wait.
Lord, let us be rid of Varadkar and Coveney. But not just yet.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
Indeed.
I never thought I would see the Parliament treat it's citizens like this... I guess the expense's fiddling was a warning of the contempt this House Of Thieves has for it's voter's but even after that I'm shocked at what's happening now...
You seem to be suffering an overload of apostrophes GIN old boy... time to calm down.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
Well technically speaking it can be, entirely legally; we never lived in a democracy where a referendum result had to be implemented. The question is should they be ignored, and, if the will of the people changes, how often is reasonable enough to stop or revisit something as a result (if we remain and a year later there is a swing to leave, will remainers say it is time for another vote? Don't make me laugh)
It can. It was advisory.
??
I Know, that's why I said it could ignore the will of the people.
Of all the cretinosities of May's handling of Brexit, failing to keep the DUP on board was easily the most bafflingly, idiotically, self-destructively, incompetently unnecessary unforced error.
May decided to betray the DUP all on her lonesome. Nobody told her to do it. Barnier didn't make her do it. She just did it.
We tried to tell you it would end in tears, Mrs May.
It will end with us remaining in the EU, who cares whether it ends in tears for May or the Tories?
Also, it's not like the Tory rebels would have accepted many other solutions anyway.
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Indeed - any constitutional referendum should have a sensible threshold set.
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
On a constituency level though it was a landslide for Leave... And most especially in Tory held seats...
If Tories really cared about the low pay of the Working classes, they wouldn't have been screwing them for years.
I would trust the late Bob Crowe on the issue, not JRM or Boris.
If anyone wants to see how awful a negotiator Boris actually was, just take a look at the huuge deals TFL (Crow) managed to get out of him whilst he was Mayor.
'I doubt you will find a better offer than this anywhere else in the public sector,' said union boss Bob Crow
That's a bit harsh - what about that fantastic deal Boris got on those water cannon?
We didn't even get a bowl of tulips out of the millions he spent on the garden bridge.
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Indeed - any constitutional referendum should have a sensible threshold set.
Well, I've completely changed my mind in view of the deal-trashing. I think that the probability of Article 50 being extended is now something like 90%, and the probabilities for the eventual outcome something like:
Leave with no deal: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar without a referendum: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar after a referendum: 20% Revoke Article 50 (unilaterally or by agreement) after a referendum: 65% Other more obscure variants: 5%
I accept that this looks wacky, especially the very high probability of an Article 50 extension, but unless parliament agrees to support the current deal, it's incredibly hard to see any choice. This is especially so given the Grieve amendment has passed.
I also accept that I'm going out on a bit of a limb in seeming so sure that a referendum would produce a Revoke result. But that's because I think that the parliamentary arithmetic dictates that any referendum will be Revoke vs The Deal, and nearly everyone seems (wrongly) agreed that The Deal is a disaster. So Revoke becomes the favourite.
Needless to say I have little confidence in any of these estimates. Who the hell knows?
Evidence - especially given that we could veto the entire budget.
Our veto will rapidly become worthless in almost all areas. It was worth listening to Daniela Schwarzer on PM last night. She is the Director of the German Council on Foreign Relations and was commenting on the issues with Italy. She said exactly what I have been saying for years now. The only way that the Eurozone and the EU in general can survive in the long term is with a hugely increased integration programme and what she called 'finishing the Eurozone project'. That means political and economic integration including the raising of EU taxation and EU control of economic policy.
Britain can only ever be a barrier to that. That is why they will either have to force our veto off us or force us out of the EU. Far better that we are out now so they can get on with their integration project because we sure as hell can't stop it.
That is precisely why Cameron's renegotiation agreement was so important. He'd managed to get the EU to agree that the EU treaties did not give them carte blanche to establish Eurozone hegemony. We had the best of both worlds, now alas thrown away.
But for all the reasons articulated by Miss Schwarzer that is ultimately meaningless. Look at how Cameron used his veto in 2011 to prevent the use of EU institutions for Eurozone business and was effectively ignored. He vetoed a treaty so the EU just ignored him and did what they wanted to do without a treaty. They need Eurozone hegemony within the EU and they will get it no matter how much the British about and scream about it. The alternative is the collapse of the Euro in the next financial crisis.
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Indeed - any constitutional referendum should have a sensible threshold set.
Not sure an artificial bar should be put in place for revocation of Art 50.
In fairness, Crow was one of the most awesome negotiators in living memory. Boris had no chance against him. A true giant of the trade union movement - I almost never agreed with him, but no-one could doubt his skills. We will probably never see his like again.
I have a Tory friend who often suffered from Crow's disruption, but said that as a driver he'd have voted for him. (My friend is a free marketeer who thinks everyone should fight their corner.)
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
Indeed.
I never thought I would see the Parliament treat it's citizens like this... I guess the expense's fiddling was a warning of the contempt this House Of Thieves has for it's voter's but even after that I'm shocked at what's happening now...
You seem to be suffering an overload of apostrophes GIN old boy... time to calm down.
#leavergrammar
Joking! Joking!
I like GIN. He’s into weather, so is obviously a good guy
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Indeed - any constitutional referendum should have a sensible threshold set.
x 1000
Stupid, stupid, stupid Cameron.
Cameron and Boris. Two vacuous chancers, believing only in arrogance and self-regard. These two have done more damage to both their party and their country than any other politicians in the modern era.
Well, I've completely changed my mind in view of the deal-trashing. I think that the probability of Article 50 being extended is now something like 90%, and the probabilities for the eventual outcome something like:
Leave with no deal: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar without a referendum: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar after a referendum: 20% Remain after a referendum: 65% Other more obscure variants: 5%
I accept that this looks wacky, especially the very high probability of an Article 50 extension, but unless parliament agrees to support the current deal, it's incredibly hard to see any choice. This is especially so given the Grieve amendment has passed.
I also accept that I'm going out on a bit of a limb in seeming so sure that a referendum would produce a Revoke result. But that's because I think that the parliamentary arithmetic dictates that any referendum will be Revoke vs The Deal, and nearly everyone seems (wrongly) agreed that The Deal is a disaster. So Revoke becomes the favourite.
Needless to say I have little confidence in any of these estimates. Who the hell knows?
If it went to a referendum I'd guess most incandescent Leavers would go Deal (something, anything rather than Remain). We're then down to how many reluctant Remainers opt for Deal, out of either democrat conviction or genuine enthusiasm for it. The latter, ironically, may depend on how much the ERG's 'Deal is worse than staying in' slogan has gained traction.
He’ll have zero credibility, even if he still has any, if that’s true. He’ll be lampooned as a bigger buffoon than Boris if that’s true, and rightly so.
If JRM votes for the deal, as leader of ERG many of that group would to.
That is why I am sceptical
The ERG proved a busted flush when it came to replacing May. Even with their support,the deal wont pass - not with the DUP voting against it.
It would if 20 to 40 Labour MPs did
Even Santa Claus can’t come up that number though who will.
If the alternative to May's Deal is Norway plus Customs Union and free movement many Labour MPs in Leave seats could switch to May's Deal
It’s nice to dream but until May goes there is no alternative to her deal.
There is NO alternative to May's Deal bar BINO/Remain or No Deal, the first sees a far right surge, the second economic disaster. End of conversation
Of course there is an alternative to May’s deal. 90%+ of world trade is on WTO terms and we get control of our borders,our laws and our money.
The assumption being that on the second referendum the people will finally do what they're told and vote the right way?
The political class will never learn...
Some political reporter was on BBC World Service today - some body Watson? - and in response to a question as to how brexit got into such a mes, replied that the country voted to leave the EU, which most politicians thought was naive and wrong, and wanted nothing to do with it.
He’ll have zero credibility, even if he still has any, if that’s true. He’ll be lampooned as a bigger buffoon than Boris if that’s true, and rightly so.
If JRM votes for the deal, as leader of ERG many of that group would to.
That is why I am sceptical
The ERG proved a busted flush when it came to replacing May. Even with their support,the deal wont pass - not with the DUP voting against it.
It would if 20 to 40 Labour MPs did
Even Santa Claus can’t come up that number though who will.
If the alternative to May's Deal is Norway plus Customs Union and free movement many Labour MPs in Leave seats could switch to May's Deal
It’s nice to dream but until May goes there is no alternative to her deal.
There is NO alternative to May's Deal bar BINO/Remain or No Deal, the first sees a far right surge, the second economic disaster. End of conversation
Of course there is an alternative to May’s deal. 90%+ of world trade is on WTO terms and we get control of our borders,our laws and our money.
Evidence - especially given that we could veto the entire budget.
Our veto will rapidly become worthless in almost all areas. It was worth listening to Daniela Schwarzer on PM last night. She is the Director of the German Council on Foreign Relations and was commenting on the issues with Italy. She said exactly what I have been saying for years now. The only way that the Eurozone and the EU in general can survive in the long term is with a hugely increased integration programme and what she called 'finishing the Eurozone project'. That means political and economic integration including the raising of EU taxation and EU control of economic policy.
Britain can only ever be a barrier to that. That is why they will either have to force our veto off us or force us out of the EU. Far better that we are out now so they can get on with their integration project because we sure as hell can't stop it.
That is precisely why Cameron's renegotiation agreement was so important. He'd managed to get the EU to agree that the EU treaties did not give them carte blanche to establish Eurozone hegemony. We had the best of both worlds, now alas thrown away.
But for all the reasons articulated by Miss Schwarzer that is ultimately meaningless. Look at how Cameron used his veto in 2011 to prevent the use of EU institutions for Eurozone business and was effectively ignored. He vetoed a treaty so the EU just ignored him and did what they wanted to do without a treaty. They need Eurozone hegemony within the EU and they will get it no matter how much the British about and scream about it. The alternative is the collapse of the Euro in the next financial crisis.
They don't need Eurozone hegemony in the EU. They need Eurozone convergence. Big, big difference.
Brexit of course (if it happens) removes the big UK economy from the non-Eurozone EU members, and therefore pretty much guarantees that Eurozone interests take over the EU completely. That's particularly bad news for the City, but there we go. It's a strong argument against a Norway+ endpoint, though, because we'd end up with the City completely in thrall to a hostile Eurozone with the UK having zero say in financial regulation.
In fairness, Crow was one of the most awesome negotiators in living memory. Boris had no chance against him. A true giant of the trade union movement - I almost never agreed with him, but no-one could doubt his skills. We will probably never see his like again.
I have a Tory friend who often suffered from Crow's disruption, but said that as a driver he'd have voted for him. (My friend is a free marketeer who thinks everyone should fight their corner.)
Yes, Crow visited pain and misery on me several times before the widespread adoption of home working by London firms massively mitigated the impact of any tube strike. But it is almost impossible to argue that Crow wasn’t talented - he brokered exceptional deals for his membership and was clearly worth every penny of the £140,000 (approx) salary he earned as boss of the RMT.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
You should ask WHY the Commons does not reflect the same distribution of views as the referendum did. Everybody knows politicians are mostly expense-munching tossers but that's not the reason.
FPTP is a reason but only a minor one. It doesn't explain the disparity in UKIP voteshares: first place with 27% in an EU election (2014), third place with 13% in a GE (2015), and then the win in the referendum (2016) with over 60% in 163 constituencies. Come the general election in 2017 they got 2%, narrowly beating the Greens. Why on earth? In another country they would probably be in power by now. Nigel Farage would be prime minister or at least the leader of an important partner in a coalition. But not in Britain. For many Leave voters the referendum was a chance, at long last, to say "the hell with it; the politicians have eventually managed to ask me how I really feel and they're going to find out." People did something they believed to be considered naughty and dirty, including to some extent by themselves, but which was true and "real". Those who are planning big muesli parties for when the results of the rerun are announced will be in for such a big surprise. За здоровье!
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Indeed - any constitutional referendum should have a sensible threshold set.
Not sure an artificial bar should be put in place for revocation of Art 50.
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Indeed - any constitutional referendum should have a sensible threshold set.
Not sure an artificial bar should be put in place for revocation of Art 50.
This way lies madness. Set a 60% threshold and you end up with 59% of the votes going one way and yet still being defeated. Hardly a recipe for stability and happiness.
Well, I've completely changed my mind in view of the deal-trashing. I think that the probability of Article 50 being extended is now something like 90%, and the probabilities for the eventual outcome something like:
Leave with no deal: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar without a referendum: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar after a referendum: 20% Remain after a referendum: 65% Other more obscure variants: 5%
I accept that this looks wacky, especially the very high probability of an Article 50 extension, but unless parliament agrees to support the current deal, it's incredibly hard to see any choice. This is especially so given the Grieve amendment has passed.
I also accept that I'm going out on a bit of a limb in seeming so sure that a referendum would produce a Revoke result. But that's because I think that the parliamentary arithmetic dictates that any referendum will be Revoke vs The Deal, and nearly everyone seems (wrongly) agreed that The Deal is a disaster. So Revoke becomes the favourite.
Needless to say I have little confidence in any of these estimates. Who the hell knows?
If it went to a referendum I'd guess most incandescent Leavers would go Deal (something, anything rather than Remain). We're then down to how many reluctant Remainers opt for Deal, out of either democrat conviction or genuine enthusiasm for it. The latter, ironically, may depend on how much the ERG's 'Deal is worse than staying in' slogan has gained traction.
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
Well, I've completely changed my mind in view of the deal-trashing. I think that the probability of Article 50 being extended is now something like 90%, and the probabilities for the eventual outcome something like:
Leave with no deal: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar without a referendum: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar after a referendum: 20% Remain after a referendum: 65% Other more obscure variants: 5%
I accept that this looks wacky, especially the very high probability of an Article 50 extension, but unless parliament agrees to support the current deal, it's incredibly hard to see any choice. This is especially so given the Grieve amendment has passed.
I also accept that I'm going out on a bit of a limb in seeming so sure that a referendum would produce a Revoke result. But that's because I think that the parliamentary arithmetic dictates that any referendum will be Revoke vs The Deal, and nearly everyone seems (wrongly) agreed that The Deal is a disaster. So Revoke becomes the favourite.
Needless to say I have little confidence in any of these estimates. Who the hell knows?
If it went to a referendum I'd guess most incandescent Leavers would go Deal (something, anything rather than Remain). We're then down to how many reluctant Remainers opt for Deal, out of either democrat conviction or genuine enthusiasm for it. The latter, ironically, may depend on how much the ERG's 'Deal is worse than staying in' slogan has gained traction.
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
Remember that in a referendum campaign the fact that "deal" means years more negotiations about the future relationship will be hammered again and again. People who just want it to be over will swing to Remain.
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
Some Tories. I don't buy that remain/revoke would lose vs the deal - in that scenario virtually all of labour, plenty of Tories and every other political party would have already and continue to trash the deal.
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
Some Tories. I don't buy that remain/revoke would lose vs the deal - in that scenario virtually all of labour, plenty of Tories and every other political party would have already and continue to trash the deal.
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
Some Tories. I don't buy that remain/revoke would lose vs the deal - in that scenario virtually all of labour, plenty of Tories and every other political party would have already and continue to trash the deal.
And the deal will have the added stigma of being seen as letting the EU "win".
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
Some Tories. I don't buy that remain/revoke would lose vs the deal - in that scenario virtually all of labour, plenty of Tories and every other political party would have already and continue to trash the deal.
That’s the point he is making I think?
I know, but others believe deal would win against remain.
Well, I've completely changed my mind in view of the deal-trashing. I think that the probability of Article 50 being extended is now something like 90%, and the probabilities for the eventual outcome something like:
Leave with no deal: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar without a referendum: 5% Leave with the current deal or something similar after a referendum: 20% Remain after a referendum: 65% Other more obscure variants: 5%
I accept that this looks wacky, especially the very high probability of an Article 50 extension, but unless parliament agrees to support the current deal, it's incredibly hard to see any choice. This is especially so given the Grieve amendment has passed.
I also accept that I'm going out on a bit of a limb in seeming so sure that a referendum would produce a Revoke result. But that's because I think that the parliamentary arithmetic dictates that any referendum will be Revoke vs The Deal, and nearly everyone seems (wrongly) agreed that The Deal is a disaster. So Revoke becomes the favourite.
Needless to say I have little confidence in any of these estimates. Who the hell knows?
If it went to a referendum I'd guess most incandescent Leavers would go Deal (something, anything rather than Remain). We're then down to how many reluctant Remainers opt for Deal, out of either democrat conviction or genuine enthusiasm for it. The latter, ironically, may depend on how much the ERG's 'Deal is worse than staying in' slogan has gained traction.
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
Remember that in a referendum campaign the fact that "deal" means years more negotiations about the future relationship will be hammered again and again. People who just want it to be over will swing to Remain.
Yes, the fact that Deal leaves us endlessly negotiating with the EU without control might indeed swing the ‘we are sick of it’ Leaver grouping either to Remain or (more likely) Abstain.
So, any defeats upcoming for the government in the coming days or are the votes all done until the 11th?
Mmmm. There weren't supposed to be any votes today, until late last night. To lose 3 votes when there weren't any is quite something. They may contrive a way to lose some tomorrow too.
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
Some Tories. I don't buy that remain/revoke would lose vs the deal - in that scenario virtually all of labour, plenty of Tories and every other political party would have already and continue to trash the deal.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
You should ask WHY the Commons does not reflect the same distribution of views as the referendum did. Everybody knows politicians are mostly expense-munching tossers but that's not the reason.
FPTP is a reason but only a minor one. It doesn't explain the disparity in UKIP voteshares: first place with 27% in an EU election (2014), third place with 13% in a GE (2015), and then the win in the referendum (2016) with over 60% in 163 constituencies. Come the general election in 2017 they got 2%, narrowly beating the Greens. Why on earth? In another country they would probably be in power by now. Nigel Farage would be prime minister or at least the leader of an important partner in a coalition. But not in Britain. For many Leave voters the referendum was a chance, at long last, to say "the hell with it; the politicians have eventually managed to ask me how I really feel and they're going to find out." People did something they believed to be considered naughty and dirty, including to some extent by themselves, but which was true and "real". Those who are planning big muesli parties for when the results of the rerun are announced will be in for such a big surprise. За здоровье!
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
Indeed - any constitutional referendum should have a sensible threshold set.
x 1000
Stupid, stupid, stupid Cameron.
Cameron and Boris. Two vacuous chancers, believing only in arrogance and self-regard. These two have done more damage to both their party and their country than any other politicians in the modern era.
Yes - with the threshold sat at 60% Cameron could have gone back with his changes and said any chance of a little more on X or Y...
He’ll have zero credibility, even if he still has any, if that’s true. He’ll be lampooned as a bigger buffoon than Boris if that’s true, and rightly so.
If JRM votes for the deal, as leader of ERG many of that group would to.
That is why I am sceptical
The ERG proved a busted flush when it came to replacing May. Even with their support,the deal wont pass - not with the DUP voting against it.
It would if 20 to 40 Labour MPs did
Even Santa Claus can’t come up that number though who will.
If the alternative to May's Deal is Norway plus Customs Union and free movement many Labour MPs in Leave seats could switch to May's Deal
It’s nice to dream but until May goes there is no alternative to her deal.
There is NO alternative to May's Deal bar BINO/Remain or No Deal, the first sees a far right surge, the second economic disaster. End of conversation
Of course there is an alternative to May’s deal. 90%+ of world trade is on WTO terms and we get control of our borders,our laws and our money.
Virtually no major economy does not have at least a trade deal with its largest market and with Trump etc the WTO is hanging together by barely a thread anyway
I doubt it has gained that much traction with (a very bored and disengaged) Joe Public and that’s why I think Deal wins handily vs Remain. Richard N’s post really surprised me. I don’t agree, but I could be wildly wrong. As he himself says, “who knows?”
If I'm right and it comes down to Revoke vs The Deal, who's going to be campaigning for the deal?
Some Tories. I don't buy that remain/revoke would lose vs the deal - in that scenario virtually all of labour, plenty of Tories and every other political party would have already and continue to trash the deal.
Listening to the debate in the commons there are so many divergent views on Brexit that no compromise will ever get a majority. I am astounded how so many speakers just ignore the referendum result. It’s like they think we no longer live in a democracy and the will of the people can be ignored.
You should ask WHY the Commons does not reflect the same distribution of views as the referendum did. Everybody knows politicians are mostly expense-munching tossers but that's not the reason.
FPTP is a reason but only a minor one. It doesn't explain the disparity in UKIP voteshares: first place with 27% in an EU election (2014), third place with 13% in a GE (2015), and then the win in the referendum (2016) with over 60% in 163 constituencies. Come the general election in 2017 they got 2%, narrowly beating the Greens. Why on earth? In another country they would probably be in power by now. Nigel Farage would be prime minister or at least the leader of an important partner in a coalition. But not in Britain. For many Leave voters the referendum was a chance, at long last, to say "the hell with it; the politicians have eventually managed to ask me how I really feel and they're going to find out." People did something they believed to be considered naughty and dirty, including to some extent by themselves, but which was true and "real". Those who are planning big muesli parties for when the results of the rerun are announced will be in for such a big surprise. За здоровье!
Nutter O’Clock.
Ooh! I do like some nuts on my meuesli for Brexit.
Evidence - especially given that we could veto the entire budget.
Our veto will rapidly become worthless in almost all areas. It was worth listening to Daniela Schwarzer on PM last night. She is the Director of the German Council on Foreign Relations and was commenting on the issues with Italy. She said exactly what I have been saying for years now. The only way that the Eurozone and the EU in general can survive in the long term is with a hugely increased integration programme and what she called 'finishing the Eurozone project'. That means political and economic integration including the raising of EU taxation and EU control of economic policy.
Britain can only ever be a barrier to that. That is why they will either have to force our veto off us or force us out of the EU. Far better that we are out now so they can get on with their integration project because we sure as hell can't stop it.
That is precisely why Cameron's renegotiation agreement was so important. He'd managed to get the EU to agree that the EU treaties did not give them carte blanche to establish Eurozone hegemony. We had the best of both worlds, now alas thrown away.
But for all the reasons articulated by Miss Schwarzer that is ultimately meaningless. Look at how Cameron used his veto in 2011 to prevent the use of EU institutions for Eurozone business and was effectively ignored. He vetoed a treaty so the EU just ignored him and did what they wanted to do without a treaty. They need Eurozone hegemony within the EU and they will get it no matter how much the British about and scream about it. The alternative is the collapse of the Euro in the next financial crisis.
Britain isn't in the Eurozone, so isn't subject to Eurozone-only decisions, and doesn't have a practical veto on them, even though it may be indirectly affected by them. Britain couldn't have avoided that by stopping the Eurozone member states from using EU institutions for them, which is why Cameron stopped insisting on it once the grandstanding period had finished and the British media had moved on.
This was always going to be the result of staying out of the Eurozone. Brexit extends this situation to everything, except the indirect effects of EU decisions are far bigger, and the influence Britain has on them is even smaller.
Comments
Something that they have done fairly effectively, albeit with some tactics that are best seen at a distance such as in the Sahel.
The numbers are now sharply down, to the level of a decade ago
https://twitter.com/EUHomeAffairs/status/1069927740487413762?s=19
If it wasn't for this one disastrous compromise there would be no reason not to accept the deal. But this is not reasonable to accept.
Let's not have them see it as losing proper Brexit, and more a victory in avoiding terrible Brexit.
But on the point I was simply answering Topping's incorrect assertion that the EFTA countries dismissed it out of hand. They didn't. Two stayed silent, one was strongly in favour and one was sceptical.
How's that working out for you?
Sad about the early death Bob Crow - he was the man we loved to hate - but he added a great deal to British political life. To his credit, Boris gave a gracious testimony to him on his passing.
May decided to betray the DUP all on her lonesome. Nobody told her to do it. Barnier didn't make her do it. She just did it.
We tried to tell you it would end in tears, Mrs May.
Julia Hitler-Brewer is hecking furious rn https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1070060079716667392
I never thought I would see Parliament treat it's citizens like this... I guess the expenses fiddling was a warning of the contempt this House Of Thieves has for it's voters but even after that I'm shocked at what's happening now...
But, it does look like we are in the end game now.
Lord, let us be rid of Varadkar and Coveney. But not just yet.
I Know, that's why I said it could ignore the will of the people.
Also, it's not like the Tory rebels would have accepted many other solutions anyway.
Seems to me the HoC is a fair reflection of a country utterly divided, roughly 50:50 on the EU, with various sub-groups within each portion who disagree on various aspects and nuances.
Yes, Leave won. But by far too small a margin to settle matters.
Cameron's failure to add a threshold was a calamity.
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1070081221970022400
Night all!
Stupid, stupid, stupid Cameron.
Leave with no deal: 5%
Leave with the current deal or something similar without a referendum: 5%
Leave with the current deal or something similar after a referendum: 20%
Revoke Article 50 (unilaterally or by agreement) after a referendum: 65%
Other more obscure variants: 5%
I accept that this looks wacky, especially the very high probability of an Article 50 extension, but unless parliament agrees to support the current deal, it's incredibly hard to see any choice. This is especially so given the Grieve amendment has passed.
I also accept that I'm going out on a bit of a limb in seeming so sure that a referendum would produce a Revoke result. But that's because I think that the parliamentary arithmetic dictates that any referendum will be Revoke vs The Deal, and nearly everyone seems (wrongly) agreed that The Deal is a disaster. So Revoke becomes the favourite.
Needless to say I have little confidence in any of these estimates. Who the hell knows?
The political class will never learn...
Joking! Joking!
I like GIN. He’s into weather, so is obviously a good guy
Brexit of course (if it happens) removes the big UK economy from the non-Eurozone EU members, and therefore pretty much guarantees that Eurozone interests take over the EU completely. That's particularly bad news for the City, but there we go. It's a strong argument against a Norway+ endpoint, though, because we'd end up with the City completely in thrall to a hostile Eurozone with the UK having zero say in financial regulation.
FPTP is a reason but only a minor one. It doesn't explain the disparity in UKIP voteshares: first place with 27% in an EU election (2014), third place with 13% in a GE (2015), and then the win in the referendum (2016) with over 60% in 163 constituencies. Come the general election in 2017 they got 2%, narrowly beating the Greens. Why on earth? In another country they would probably be in power by now. Nigel Farage would be prime minister or at least the leader of an important partner in a coalition. But not in Britain. For many Leave voters the referendum was a chance, at long last, to say "the hell with it; the politicians have eventually managed to ask me how I really feel and they're going to find out." People did something they believed to be considered naughty and dirty, including to some extent by themselves, but which was true and "real". Those who are planning big muesli parties for when the results of the rerun are announced will be in for such a big surprise. За здоровье!
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-nearest-run-thing/
To lose 3 votes when there weren't any is quite something. They may contrive a way to lose some tomorrow too.
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1070090170597339138
Make Britain Sane Again.
This was always going to be the result of staying out of the Eurozone. Brexit extends this situation to everything, except the indirect effects of EU decisions are far bigger, and the influence Britain has on them is even smaller.