Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
(Near) certainties in
I've assumed that this would most likely evolve out of the Labour Right and Tory Left temporarily joining forces in a panic around late February/early March time, but frankly who knows?
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly. For that reason, I would be happy to see them try that, but Nicola Sturgeon is not that stupid. Moreover ,.
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensiv An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
You just do not know the Scots or their attitude to the Westminster Government
Why did the SNP lose 40% of its Westminster seats in 2017?
They won't make the same mistake again and Brexit has been toxic for many Scots
So their idea of democracy is asking the same question until you get the answer you want rather than accept the verdict of the electorate. They lost. They should get over themselves.
Well that at least would be some good news. If Soubry quit the Tories she would at least be out of Parliament at the next election. I suppose every cloud has a silver lining.
Trouble with Soubry is that her One Nation is the EU.
Just realised the crunchpoint is actually going to come much sooner than March.
It will happen the moment TMay's deal is voted down in January.
At that point, the government will be asked: OK, so what is your plan for Brexit, now we know the Deal is a dud? TMay will not be allowed to say, Oh, the deal goes on, not any more.
So what does she say? Can she honestly turn to the Commons, and the people, and say: I'm going for No Deal, Crash Brexit?
If she does, that's when she, or her government, will be VONC'd. Ergo, she will have to offer something else: A GE, a new referendum, revocation - or she tells the Commons to make the choice.
January. Buckle up.
You have it in one. January will be 'the' moment in brexit and no one knows the outcome
Kudos to Channel 4 for its perfect timing of the Cumberbatch Brexit drama.
I ffee sure a variant of this must have been posted, but apparently Diane Abbot has been appointed Manager of Manchester Utd. Her past record of played 26 won 39 was the clincher.
As was her impressive goal difference. With a remarkable +62 goal difference from those 26 games.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
(Near) certainties in
I've assumed that this would most likely evolve out of the Labour Right and Tory Left temporarily joining forces in a panic around late February/early March time, but frankly who knows?
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
S
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
You just do not know the Scots or their attitude to the Westminster Government
Why did the SNP lose 40% of its Westminster seats in 2017?
They won't make the same mistake again and Brexit has been toxic for many Scots
Brexit was already 12 months in the past at the time of the 2017 election.Why is the SNP polling consistently below their poll ratings for April /May 2017? Why are Labour's poll ratings higher than during that period?
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly. For that reason, I would be happy to see them try that, but Nicola Sturgeon is not that stupid. Moreover , voters in Scotland are as sick to death of Brexit as the rest of the UK. Another constitutional wrangle over Independence is not something they would welcome.
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
So their idea of democracy is asking the same question until you get the answer you want rather than accept the verdict of the electorate. They lost. They should get over themselves.
Brexit is on offer but brexiteers are going to lose it through greed
Whatever the definition of One Nation Tory, Soubry is not it. She is just a rogue agent anyway at the moment because she knows that she has lost Broxtowe for the Tories at the next election and no other association in its right mind would touch her.
It's an area where everyone is low-information. To understand all the consequences of 'no-deal' would be to understand the entirety of the UK economy, one of the most complex in the world. On that basis, it's easier just to fling poo like the primates we are.
I'm glad the government is enacting its contingency plans. I will be fucking livid if they have to be carried out; it would be a political failure of the first magnitude.
" To understand all the consequences of 'no-deal' would be to understand the entirety of the UK economy, one of the most complex in the world."
That's a point I made on the last thread. I'm rather unbothered about the big-ticket issues like whether planes will be able to fly - not the least because I rarely fly.
What concerns me are the small-ticket items, the things that just happen because they always have, and fall under the radar of grand planning schemes. Yet they might have an effect far greater than their individual value.
As an example, the worldwide car industry had problems after the Japanese tsunami, as a factory making a certain pigment paint (red, from memory) was knocked out, and few people had any stocks. It would be easy for say, problems with the import of LEDs to cause large-scale problems in our industry as production lines shut for the lack of a single irreplaceable, cheap component.
I would hope that adult on all sides would prevent this sort of thing happening, but the Gallileo mess doesn't fill me with hope that there are adults on any side.
I recall problems for the electronics industry post-Kobe earthquake in 1994. A worldwide shortage of *thing-I-can't-quite-remember* used for packaging ICs.
I completely agree. The UK will turn into a wasteland due to a shortage of Calcium hypochlorite or summat.
O/T Friday is the 30th anniversary of the Lockerbie disaster.
Yep. 1988 was a year of disasters. Earlier in the year we had the 30th anniversary of Piper Alpha and September was the 30th Anniversary of the Ocean Odyssey. January will also be the 30th Anniversary of the Kegworth Air Crash on the M1
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
(Near) certainties in
I've assumed that this would most likely evolve out of the Labour Right and Tory Left temporarily joining forces in a panic around late February/early March time, but frankly who knows?
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
S
Boy are you out of touch with opinion ection any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
You just do not know the Scots or their attitude to the Westminster Government
Why did the SNP lose 40% of its Westminster seats in 2017?
They won't make the same mistake again and Brexit has been toxic for many Scots
Brexit was already 12 months in the past at the time of the 2017 election.Why is the SNP polling consistently below their poll ratings for April /May 2017? Why are Labour's poll ratings higher than during that period?
Brexit is now and is causing fury in Scotland and the SNP are milking it
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
(Near) certainties in
I've assumed that this would most likely evolve out of the Labour Right and Tory Left temporarily joining forces in a panic around late February/early March time, but frankly who knows?
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly. For that reason, I would be happy to see them try that, but Nicola Sturgeon is not that stupid. Moreover , voters in Scotland are as sick to death of Brexit as the rest of the UK. Another constitutional wrangle over Independence is not something they would welcome.
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
You just do not know the Scots or their attitude to the Westminster Government
Why did the SNP lose 40% of its Westminster seats in 2017?
They won't make the same mistake again and Brexit has been toxic for many Scots
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could come about. Most realistic is something similar to 1981, with mass defections from Labour to Lib Dem, which by reducing the fear of a Corbyn government then removes one of the props to the Tory vote share (especially if combined with a No Deal Brexit recession). Presumably a change of leader would need to come into the bargain.
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
But I still reckon that there's going to need to be some kind of realignment to break the impasse if No Deal is to be averted - assuming that a majority of MPs continues to shun May's Deal.
I've assumed that this would most likely evolve out of the Labour Right and Tory Left temporarily joining forces in a panic around late February/early March time, but frankly who knows?
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The fannies will have little option to not agree. They will not want to be up in court , every country has a right to self determination. You bawheid.
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
Wasn't it you that just recently told us that no deal Brexit was nailed on? If only you could find some sort of happy medium.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
The thing is, the Tories have a chance to win the next election if they:
1. Vote through May's Deal 2. Exit the EU on March 29th and claim Brexit victory 3. Persuade May to step down soon after 4. Have an orderly leadership election in the summer and avoid electing an extremist 5. Call an autumn election on the back of that, before the next inevitable recession rolls in
Not impossbile for a well-organised party. (I don't expect the Tories to manage it.)
So their idea of democracy is asking the same question until you get the answer you want rather than accept the verdict of the electorate. They lost. They should get over themselves.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
So you answer is ignore the vote, cancel Brexit and just pretend it never happened. You really are a lunatic.
Evening all. I wonder if all this no deal planning will encourage Conservative remain leaning MPs to vote for a referendum rather than move them towards TMay’s deal as intended.
I thought the right to move, and vote on, amendments had already been established? Not least by the Grieve amendment. So how much of this is really news?
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
(Near) certainties in
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
S
Boy are you out of touch with opinion ection any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
You just do not know the Scots or their attitude to the Westminster Government
Why did the SNP lose 40% of its Westminster seats in 2017?
They won't make the same mistake again and Brexit has been toxic for many Scots
Brexit was already 12 months in the past at the time of the 2017 election.Why is the SNP polling consistently below their poll ratings for April /May 2017? Why are Labour's poll ratings higher than during that period?
Brexit is now and is causing fury in Scotland and the SNP are milking it
Why is the SNP falling below the poll ratings recorded 18 months or so ago?
Just realised the crunchpoint is actually going to come much sooner than March.
It will happen the moment TMay's deal is voted down in January.
At that point, the government will be asked: OK, so what is your plan for Brexit, now we know the Deal is a dud? TMay will not be allowed to say, Oh, the deal goes on, not any more.
So what does she say? Can she honestly turn to the Commons, and the people, and say: I'm going for No Deal, Crash Brexit?
If she does, that's when she, or her government, will be VONC'd. Ergo, she will have to offer something else: A GE, a new referendum, revocation - or she tells the Commons to make the choice.
January. Buckle up.
Indeed. Why do you think she cancelled the MV last week?
On the evidence so far the Prime Minister will try to get her deal through until it is actually impossible constitutionally, politically and practically to do so; it is the only realisable deal in town.
Has anyone given attention to the issue of whether she can carry on seeking to get it through AFTER the treaties cease to apply on 29th March? So far as I can see she can. If 30th March and a few days after proves to be anything like what people predict it would concentrate minds in the House of Commons quite a bit.
FFS, some sense. Exactly my proposal, on here, last week. It is the only choice, and she is right to offer it at the same time as her Deal in the MV.
The Commons will have the real and final say. If they vote down everything, they know that No Deal will be the result. I can't see them doing that.
Parliament will decide. Good.
The implication of this is that the order in which amendments are selected for a vote may matter. Presumably the first one (if any) that passes excludes consideration of any others and the Deal itself.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
The thing is, the Tories have a chance to win the next election if they:
1. Vote through May's Deal 2. Exit the EU on March 29th and claim Brexit victory 3. Persuade May to step down soon after 4. Have an orderly leadership election in the summer and avoid electing an extremist 5. Call an autumn election on the back of that, before the next inevitable recession rolls in
Not impossbile for a well-organised party. (I don't expect the Tories to manage it.)
I truly don't care about the Tory party but your timeline does seem the best way to ensure stability, for the country if not the Tories.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could come about. Most realistic is something similar to 1981, with mass defections from Labour to Lib Dem, which by reducing the fear of a Corbyn government then removes one of the props to the Tory vote share (especially if combined with a No Deal Brexit recession). Presumably a change of leader would need to come into the bargain.
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The fannies will have little option to not agree. They will not want to be up in court , every country has a right to self determination. You bawheid.
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
Away you deluded half witted moronic idiot, Scotland bears no comparison to Catalonia. Scotland is and always has been a country. Would we just love to see those halfwits try that. PS: you are so thick that you don't know the union has no written constitution , the liars in Westminster make it up.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
So you answer is ignore the vote, cancel Brexit and just pretend it never happened. You really are a lunatic.
Again abuse from you.
I've consistently said I'm opposed to cancelling Brexit or calling another referendum until after we've left.
My comment was in response to SeanT discussing the odds/chances of another referendum.
It's an area where everyone is low-information. To understand all the consequences of 'no-deal' would be to understand the entirety of the UK economy, one of the most complex in the world. On that basis, it's easier just to fling poo like the primates we are.
I'm glad the government is enacting its contingency plans. I will be fucking livid if they have to be carried out; it would be a political failure of the first magnitude.
" To understand all the consequences of 'no-deal' would be to understand the entirety of the UK economy, one of the most complex in the world."
That's a point I made on the last thread. I'm rather unbothered about the big-ticket issues like whether planes will be able to fly - not the least because I rarely fly.
What concerns me are the small-ticket items, the things that just happen because they always have, and fall under the radar of grand planning schemes. Yet they might have an effect far greater than their individual value.
As an example, the worldwide car industry had problems after the Japanese tsunami, as a factory making a certain pigment paint (red, from memory) was knocked out, and few people had any stocks. It would be easy for say, problems with the import of LEDs to cause large-scale problems in our industry as production lines shut for the lack of a single irreplaceable, cheap component.
I would hope that adult on all sides would prevent this sort of thing happening, but the Gallileo mess doesn't fill me with hope that there are adults on any side.
I recall problems for the electronics industry post-Kobe earthquake in 1994. A worldwide shortage of *thing-I-can't-quite-remember* used for packaging ICs.
Heh. Mrs J is just going through a pre-Christmas tape-out hell. It's a lovely Christmas present: whilst all your neighbours are winding down for Christmas, work until 22.30 each night so we can get our slot at the fab.
But as an example of the sort of supply chain something a few milimetres square might have: one of our chips was fab'ed in China, sent to Austria for packaging, then to the US for testing, and to the UK and China for development/test and production respectively. It only takes one officious REMF at the border for the entire chain to come crashing down.
So their idea of democracy is asking the same question until you get the answer you want rather than accept the verdict of the electorate. They lost. They should get over themselves.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
So you answer is ignore the vote, cancel Brexit and just pretend it never happened. You really are a lunatic.
Not alone on here Richard, it is teeming with them
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
The thing is, the Tories have a chance to win the next election if they:
1. Vote through May's Deal 2. Exit the EU on March 29th and claim Brexit victory 3. Persuade May to step down soon after 4. Have an orderly leadership election in the summer and avoid electing an extremist 5. Call an autumn election on the back of that, before the next inevitable recession rolls in
Not impossbile for a well-organised party. (I don't expect the Tories to manage it.)
I truly don't care about the Tory party but your timeline does seem the best way to ensure stability, for the country if not the Tories.
Sadly no stability. The circus moves on. That election will be about the mandate to negotiate what happens after the WA. There will be no end of pain.
So their idea of democracy is asking the same question until you get the answer you want rather than accept the verdict of the electorate. They lost. They should get over themselves.
Brexit is on offer but brexiteers are going to lose it through greed
Whatever is on offer is not Brexit, which is probably why you support it. May’s deal is dead.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
The thing is, the Tories have a chance to win the next election if they:
1. Vote through May's Deal 2. Exit the EU on March 29th and claim Brexit victory 3. Persuade May to step down soon after 4. Have an orderly leadership election in the summer and avoid electing an extremist 5. Call an autumn election on the back of that, before the next inevitable recession rolls in
Not impossbile for a well-organised party. (I don't expect the Tories to manage it.)
The weakness is Point 5. What makes you think the recession will wait 12(ish) months? Retail is already reporting poor numbers and business is getting skittish about Brexit.
The economic poop will hit the air conditioner prior to Brexit day.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
So you answer is ignore the vote, cancel Brexit and just pretend it never happened. You really are a lunatic.
Again abuse from you.
I've consistently said I'm opposed to cancelling Brexit or calling another referendum until after we've left.
My comment was in response to SeanT discussing the odds/chances of another referendum.
Revocation of Article 50 is cancelling Brexit as well you know. If you are going to be so dishonest then you deserve all the abuse you get.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
If the majority in Parliament really wants to put a stop to this process then revocation is the best option. Just so long as they vote for dissolution once the necessary legislative processes have been completed.
After taking such a bold move a reckoning will be needed, and a General Election is in keeping with our constitutional traditions in a way that referendums simply aren't. If the voters disagree with Parliament then they can install a Brexit majority in the next HoC; if they agree (or aren't sufficiently moved one way or another) then they can let the politicians responsible for revocation get away with it and keep their seats.
The country's and Parliament's positions on the EU urgently need to be brought back into sync if we're even to begin to move on. This is the means to do it.
FFS, some sense. Exactly my proposal, on here, last week. It is the only choice, and she is right to offer it at the same time as her Deal in the MV.
The Commons will have the real and final say. If they vote down everything, they know that No Deal will be the result. I can't see them doing that.
Parliament will decide. Good.
Indeed, if Norway+ and EUref2 are both voted down by the Commons then the Deal becomes the only alternative to the economic damage of No Deal by default
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could come about. Most realistic is something similar to 1981, with mass defections from Labour to Lib Dem, which by reducing the fear of a Corbyn government then removes one of the props to the Tory vote share (especially if combined with a No Deal Brexit recession). Presumably a change of leader would need to come into the bargain.
(Near) certainties in British politics:
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The fannies will have little option to not agree. They will not want to be up in court , every country has a right to self determination. You bawheid.
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
Away you deluded half witted moronic idiot, Scotland bears no comparison to Catalonia. Scotland is and always has been a country. Would we just love to see those halfwits try that.
I will not descend to the level of abuse which clearly comes so naturally to you. Whatever you and other Nationalists care to believe , Scotland is not viewed as an independent nation state by the international community - any more than is Bavaria , Saxony, Tuscany or Lombardy. Aspirations are one thing - political reality is very different.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
So you answer is ignore the vote, cancel Brexit and just pretend it never happened. You really are a lunatic.
Again abuse from you.
I've consistently said I'm opposed to cancelling Brexit or calling another referendum until after we've left.
My comment was in response to SeanT discussing the odds/chances of another referendum.
Revocation of Article 50 is cancelling Brexit as well you know. If you are going to be so dishonest then you deserve all the abuse you get.
I was only talking about it in the context of SeanT discussing the odds/chances of it happening.
Me predicting Australia winning the next Ashes isn't the same as me wanting it to happen.
The problem is Parliament voting down "No Deal" means nothing if they also vote down the Deal. Nothing else matters - it is the Deal or leaving without a Deal - everything else is pointless obfuscation not worth Parliamentary time.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could the bargain.
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The fannies will have little option to not agree. They will not want to be up in court , every country has a right to self determination. You bawheid.
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
Away you deluded half witted moronic idiot, Scotland bears no comparison to Catalonia. Scotland is and always has been a country. Would we just love to see those halfwits try that. PS: you are so thick that you don't know the union has no written constitution , the liars in Westminster make it up.
Emotionally, and despite being British, I have always held a fondness for Scotland and have some sympathy for its desire for independence. But, objectively, surely the huge challenges that the UK has ran into in trying to plot a course to divorce from the EU underlines how problematic separating Scotland from the UK would be? If I were Sturgeon I'd be spending a few years working up a credible plan in some detail, including paying a few visits to the Czechs and Slovaks?
Just realised the crunchpoint is actually going to come much sooner than March.
It will happen the moment TMay's deal is voted down in January.
At that point, the government will be asked: OK, so what is your plan for Brexit, now we know the Deal is a dud? TMay will not be allowed to say, Oh, the deal goes on, not any more.
So what does she say? Can she honestly turn to the Commons, and the people, and say: I'm going for No Deal, Crash Brexit?
If she does, that's when she, or her government, will be VONC'd. Ergo, she will have to offer something else: A GE, a new referendum, revocation - or she tells the Commons to make the choice.
January. Buckle up.
Indeed. Why do you think she cancelled the MV last week?
On the evidence so far the Prime Minister will try to get her deal through until it is actually impossible constitutionally, politically and practically to do so; it is the only realisable deal in town.
Has anyone given attention to the issue of whether she can carry on seeking to get it through AFTER the treaties cease to apply on 29th March? So far as I can see she can. If 30th March and a few days after proves to be anything like what people predict it would concentrate minds in the House of Commons quite a bit.
I would not be surprised if, in early January, she finds some pretext for moving it to February.
Evening all. I wonder if all this no deal planning will encourage Conservative remain leaning MPs to vote for a referendum rather than move them towards TMay’s deal as intended.
I rather fancy that the chances of A50 revocation have moved up a few notches today. Enough MPs might get the wind up if Mrs May's demonstration of controlled flight into terrain gets a bit too realistic.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that .
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
But I still reckon that there's going to need to be some kind of realignment to break the impasse if No Deal is to be averted - assuming that a majority of MPs continues to shun May's Deal.
I've assumed that this would most likely evolve out of the Labour Right and Tory Left temporarily joining forces in a panic around late February/early March time, but frankly who knows?
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The fannies will have little option to not agree. They will not want to be up in court , every country has a right to self determination. You bawheid.
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
You insult and patronise the Scots. How dare you - no wonder they are marching towards Independence
A comment such as yours would be incendiary if my friends and family read it
Another day, another instalment of Project Fear and watch how frightened everyone gets as soon as the Army gets mentioned.
Calculated nonsense aimed at panicking frightened people into signing up to May's Deal. All she and her allies have now is fear and they are hoping a couple of weeks of this propaganda will do the job.
There's nothing that can't be arranged or sorted in plenty of time (and would have been if this group of dullards had considered the most elementary contingency planning).
No one is going to starve, run out of medicines or be stopped from going anywhere. A great man once said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Nowadays, the only weapon a bad politician has is fear.
Project Fear's predictions are obviously ridiculous.
As you say, food and medicines will still make their way to the United Kingdom, and people will not starve.
But by attacking only the most extreme of Project Fear's prognostications, there is a tendency to pretend that there will be no ill effects whatsoever from crashing out.
Now, there is a genuine debate to be had about whether the costs of a sudden separation are worth the benefits. But I'm not seeing that debate. I'm seeing two sides: one which pretends there are no consequences from crashing out, and one which forecasts armageddon. That's not a healthy debate, and it's not conducive to good policy making.
It's an area where everyone is low-information. To understand all the consequences of 'no-deal' would be to understand the entirety of the UK economy, one of the most complex in the world. On that basis, it's easier just to fling poo like the primates we are.
I'm glad the government is enacting its contingency plans. I will be fucking livid if they have to be carried out; it would be a political failure of the first magnitude.
What on earth goes on in someone's head who votes for something with a non-trivial probability of being a "political failure of the first magnitude"?
Heh. Mrs J is just going through a pre-Christmas tape-out hell. It's a lovely Christmas present: whilst all your neighbours are winding down for Christmas, work until 22.30 each night so we can get our slot at the fab.
But as an example of the sort of supply chain something a few milimetres square might have: one of our chips was fab'ed in China, sent to Austria for packaging, then to the US for testing, and to the UK and China for development/test and production respectively. It only takes one officious REMF at the border for the entire chain to come crashing down.
And I should add another example of the international connectedness of things: when she works in our study upstairs, her main office is somewhere north of London. The simulations she runs are held on servers in London and France, the software licences are held on a server in ?Austria?, and the actual simulations run on a server farm in America where you schedule processor cores by the dozen.
And she 'runs' all this from her laptop as if it was all on her hard drive.
Details are deliberately imprecise to protect her employer.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
If the majority in Parliament really wants to put a stop to this process then revocation is the best option. Just so long as they vote for dissolution once the necessary legislative processes have been completed.
After taking such a bold move a reckoning will be needed, and a General Election is in keeping with our constitutional traditions in a way that referendums simply aren't. If the voters disagree with Parliament then they can install a Brexit majority in the next HoC; if they agree (or aren't sufficiently moved one way or another) then they can let the politicians responsible for revocation get away with it and keep their seats.
The country's and Parliament's positions on the EU urgently need to be brought back into sync if we're even to begin to move on. This is the means to do it.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
I don't see why it should be messy. The EU can be prompt and sensible when it suits - see the swift ECJ judgement on revocation.
If HMG, via parliament, decides to go for a referendum, conference calls will be made to every EU capital, and Brussels, and it would be agreed in an afternoon. A50 will be extended as the Brits think again. The EU has absolutely nothing to lose, and a lot to gain (the UK humbled and returned to the fold, with all its money);
One of the most under-commented aspects of Brexit is how it has made the EU more united and how they have responded more quickly, professionally and in a co-ordinated way to its challenge than has the single country that is attempting to leave. The exchanges where the EU has asked us what we want and the UK has lamely asked for an offer reflect badly on our country.
Day 2 and Theresa May has shot the second hostage on live TV. Whatever the prudent and dull details she knows the headlines will be about Trooos being put on standby and the perception the government is moving to a no deal footing. And nothing can now clarify that stance till tge week beginning 14/1. She's actively inciting political crisis and economic damage to her own ends. And she surely knows these are forces she may not be able to control.
The FTPA means parliament can vote down a government without triggering a general election, and put in place a new PM within 14 days who can request an A50 extension.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
I don't see why it should be messy. The EU can be prompt and sensible when it suits - see the swift ECJ judgement on revocation.
If HMG, via parliament, decides to go for a referendum, conference calls will be made to every EU capital, and Brussels, and it would be agreed in an afternoon. A50 will be extended as the Brits think again. The EU has absolutely nothing to lose, and a lot to gain (the UK humbled and returned to the fold, with all its money);
I think expecting Spain, Hungary, and Italy to play ball might be asking a lot.
The Withdrawal Agreement was voted under QMV, an extension to Article 50 would not, every country would have a veto.
I thought the right to move, and vote on, amendments had already been established? Not least by the Grieve amendment. So how much of this is really news?
If it is just amendments to the MV then I agree with you.
Evening all. I wonder if all this no deal planning will encourage Conservative remain leaning MPs to vote for a referendum rather than move them towards TMay’s deal as intended.
I rather fancy that the chances of A50 revocation have moved up a few notches today. Enough MPs might get the wind up if Mrs May's demonstration of controlled flight into terrain gets a bit too realistic.
I don’t think so. When May’s deal dies, we’re into a VNOC in the Gov which has to be prioritised. All the Remainers who want to get paid a lot of money for simply doing as Brussels tells them, then have a choice - show their true colours and help bring down the Gov, in which case we’re into a GE where most of them will lose their seats, or support May with no Plan B but no deal almost certain. They are in real mess which is no more than they deserve.
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
Lol, scratch a reactionary labourite, find a Rajoy style supporter of granny truncheoning and jailing opponents. Mind you, the left wing ones aren't much better.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
TSE and I disagree on Brexit, but I will defend him here. He is just making a technical and well-informed judgement call as to HOW we will postpone Brexit in time for a referendum. He is not calling for it to be cancelled. He has been honest in his position: we should Brexit and realise our error.
I disagree with him on both points, but he is not an anti-democrat.
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
If the majority in Parliament really wants to put a stop to this process then revocation is the best option. Just so long as they vote for dissolution once the necessary legislative processes have been completed.
After taking such a bold move a reckoning will be needed, and a General Election is in keeping with our constitutional traditions in a way that referendums simply aren't. If the voters disagree with Parliament then they can install a Brexit majority in the next HoC; if they agree (or aren't sufficiently moved one way or another) then they can let the politicians responsible for revocation get away with it and keep their seats.
The country's and Parliament's positions on the EU urgently need to be brought back into sync if we're even to begin to move on. This is the means to do it.
FFS, some sense. Exactly my proposal, on here, last week. It is the only choice, and she is right to offer it at the same time as her Deal in the MV.
The Commons will have the real and final say. If they vote down everything, they know that No Deal will be the result. I can't see them doing that.
Parliament will decide. Good.
She's obviously listening to you Sean. Which is a serious worry tbh.
I'd have sorted Brexit by tea-time after the referendum - that is, the referendum on the Lisbon Constitution, which I was demanding when everyone else on this site thought I was a loony, and yet it turns out I was right. If they'd listened to me and my ilk back then, we'd have voted down the Treaty, A50 wouldn't exist, Brexit woudn't be a word, and we wouldn't be here now.
I particularly remember Nick Palmer XMP on the day Brown forced Lisbon through pariliament, avoiding a popular vote. He came on here and chortled and sneered, like it was some great victory. Fucking C8nt. He's hasn't chortled so much about Brexit.
The ilk are always the problem, if only we could find them. I've never met an ilk yet they always seem to be behind everything bad that happens.
Another day, another instalment of Project Fear and watch how frightened everyone gets as soon as the Army gets mentioned.
Calculated nonsense aimed at panicking frightened people into signing up to May's Deal. All she and her allies have now is fear and they are hoping a couple of weeks of this propaganda will do the job.
There's nothing that can't be arranged or sorted in plenty of time (and would have been if this group of dullards had considered the most elementary contingency planning).
No one is going to starve, run out of medicines or be stopped from going anywhere. A great man once said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Nowadays, the only weapon a bad politician has is fear.
Project Fear's predictions are obviously ridiculous.
As you say, food and medicines will still make their way to the United Kingdom, and people will not starve.
But by attacking only the most extreme of Project Fear's prognostications, there is a tendency to pretend that there will be no ill effects whatsoever from crashing out.
Now, there is a genuine debate to be had about whether the costs of a sudden separation are worth the benefits. But I'm not seeing that debate. I'm seeing two sides: one which pretends there are no consequences from crashing out, and one which forecasts armageddon. That's not a healthy debate, and it's not conducive to good policy making.
It's an area where everyone is low-information. To understand all the consequences of 'no-deal' would be to understand the entirety of the UK economy, one of the most complex in the world. On that basis, it's easier just to fling poo like the primates we are.
I'm glad the government is enacting its contingency plans. I will be fucking livid if they have to be carried out; it would be a political failure of the first magnitude.
What on earth goes on in someone's head who votes for something with a non-trivial probability of being a "political failure of the first magnitude"?
Doubtless I will always remain a mystery to you, dear old thing. Let's see what happens before we borrow trouble, eh?
The FTPA means parliament can vote down a government without triggering a general election, and put in place a new PM within 14 days who can request an A50 extension.
Except Corbyn seems to like Brexit. He certainly is not putting any obstacles in its way
Evening all. I wonder if all this no deal planning will encourage Conservative remain leaning MPs to vote for a referendum rather than move them towards TMay’s deal as intended.
I rather fancy that the chances of A50 revocation have moved up a few notches today. Enough MPs might get the wind up if Mrs May's demonstration of controlled flight into terrain gets a bit too realistic.
I don’t think so. When May’s deal dies, we’re into a VNOC in the Gov which has to be prioritised. All the Remainers who want to get paid a lot of money for simply doing as Brussels tells them, then have a choice - show their true colours and help bring down the Gov, in which case we’re into a GE where most of them will lose their seats, or support May with no Plan B but no deal almost certain. They are in real mess which is no more than they deserve.
Your posts seem to display an element of panic as no deal disappears and even, as seems likely, brexit
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that .
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
You insult and patronise the Scots. How dare you - no wonder they are marching towards Independence
A comment such as yours would be incendiary if my friends and family read it
Not at all. It is a perfectly legitimate view to hold. There is nothing extreme about suggesting that Devolution was a mistake , and any democrat should be able to understand that. It is an issue on which I always agreed with Tam Dalyell - - his 'slippery slope' argument.You - and others - may disagree with the suggestion that the Devolution Legislation ought to be repealed, but it is a perfectly valid viewpoint and one held by many voters within Scotland itself. I am not actually arguing for such a policy , but any attempt at UDI would merit a firm response by Westminster - Holyrood can be suspended in the way that Stormont was in Spring 1972.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
I'm in Scotland, and I never hear about Brexit.
Why would you. Staying in, as wee Krankie wants, keeps us in the CFP which really hurts Scotland.
People can say how ridiculous of course troops won't be put on standby (note: troops are always on standby at some level of notice to move, with some on very short notice to move but anyway) it is as @Yellow_Submarine notes, now a talking point and most sane people will ask themselves how it can be that the government is being asked to confirm that people won't die/medicines won't run out/planes won't be grounded.
That we are in the realms of asking these questions if only to dismiss them is the key issue here.
The FTPA means parliament can vote down a government without triggering a general election, and put in place a new PM within 14 days who can request an A50 extension.
They would have to be very sure that their new PM could win a vote of confidence, or they could end up with a general election by accident. Which depending on the timing could see the clock run out whilst parliament was dissolved.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
For sure both sets have been lying through their teeth , Mundell and Davidson lying about resigning etc.
Another day, another instalment of Project Fear and watch how frightened everyone gets as soon as the Army gets mentioned.
Calculated nonsense aimed at panicking frightened people into signing up to May's Deal. All she and her allies have now is fear and they are hoping a couple of weeks of this propaganda will do the job.
There's nothing that can't be arranged or sorted in plenty of time (and would have been if this group of dullards had considered the most elementary contingency planning).
No one is going to starve, run out of medicines or be stopped from going anywhere. A great man once said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Nowadays, the only weapon a bad politician has is fear.
Project Fear's predictions are obviously ridiculous.
As you say, food and medicines will still make their way to the United Kingdom, and people will not starve.
But by attacking only the most extreme of Project Fear's prognostications, there is a tendency to pretend that there will be no ill effects whatsoever from crashing out.
Now, there is a genuine debate to be had about whether the costs of a sudden separation are worth the benefits. But I'm not seeing that debate. I'm seeing two sides: one which pretends there are no consequences from crashing out, and one which forecasts armageddon. That's not a healthy debate, and it's not conducive to good policy making.
It's an area where everyone is low-information. To understand all the consequences of 'no-deal' would be to understand the entirety of the UK economy, one of the most complex in the world. On that basis, it's easier just to fling poo like the primates we are.
I'm glad the government is enacting its contingency plans. I will be fucking livid if they have to be carried out; it would be a political failure of the first magnitude.
What on earth goes on in someone's head who votes for something with a non-trivial probability of being a "political failure of the first magnitude"?
Doubtless I will always remain a mystery to you, dear old thing. Let's see what happens before we borrow trouble, eh?
We don't need to wait and see what happens. You have told us that you voted for something which could be a political failure of the first magnitude.
WTO Brexit should have been the default. Once again it would appear the right thing will happen in a way that it never could if no-one had buggered everything up. See also Brexit itself. It's often the way.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
I'm in Scotland, and I never hear about Brexit.
Why would you. Staying in, as wee Krankie wants, keeps us in the CFP which really hurts Scotland.
Very adult , the CFP has been given away already and is minor compared to the other damage.
Evening all. I wonder if all this no deal planning will encourage Conservative remain leaning MPs to vote for a referendum rather than move them towards TMay’s deal as intended.
I rather fancy that the chances of A50 revocation have moved up a few notches today. Enough MPs might get the wind up if Mrs May's demonstration of controlled flight into terrain gets a bit too realistic.
I don’t think so. When May’s deal dies, we’re into a VNOC in the Gov which has to be prioritised. All the Remainers who want to get paid a lot of money for simply doing as Brussels tells them, then have a choice - show their true colours and help bring down the Gov, in which case we’re into a GE where most of them will lose their seats, or support May with no Plan B but no deal almost certain. They are in real mess which is no more than they deserve.
Your posts seem to display an element of panic as no deal disappears and even, as seems likely, brexit
You trot that out a lot when you have no argument. Still if it’s your equivalent of a baby’s comfort, knock yourself out continuing.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I
I'm in Scotland, and I never hear about Brexit.
People are likely to be as sick to death of it there as elsewhere in the UK.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that .
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
You insult and patronise the Scots. How dare you - no wonder they are marching towards Independence
A comment such as yours would be incendiary if my friends and family read it
Not at all. It is a perfectly legitimate view to hold. There is nothing extreme about suggesting that Devolution was a mistake , and any democrat should be able to understand that. It is an issue on which I always agreed with Tam Dalyell - - his 'slippery slope' argument.You - and others - may disagree with the suggestion that the Devolution Legislation ought to be repealed, but it is a perfectly valid viewpoint and one held by many voters within Scotland itself. I am not actually arguing for such a policy , but any attempt at UDI would merit a firm response by Westminster - Holyrood can be suspended in the way that Stormont was in Spring 1972.
Arrogance and inflammatory nonsense
and link please for 'many Scots want Devolution repealed'
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
How about a series of votes. First of all a vote on whether MPs support leaving the EU and then if that passes a vote on the realistic options which are the deal we have reached or no deal and perhaps Norway. If the first vote, on leaving the EU, does not pass then revoke A50 and have a referendum... this could go on again... I just wish a decision would be made and government could move on to dealing with other issues that are not been addressed.
Why would you. Staying in, as wee Krankie wants, keeps us in the CFP which really hurts Scotland.
As on so much else, Vote Leave (and Leave.EU) were incredibly stupid not to have spotted that the EU wasn't popular in certain regions of Scotland, and to have allocated resources accordingly. It would have altered the optics of the situation a lot if the Highland region had gone Brexit. And it was close.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
I'm in Scotland, and I never hear about Brexit.
Really when the Scots media are full of it on a daily basis
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that .
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
You insult and patronise the Scots. How dare you - no wonder they are marching towards Independence
A comment such as yours would be incendiary if my friends and family read it
Not at all. It is a perfectly legitimate view to hold. There is nothing extreme about suggesting that Devolution was a mistake , and any democrat should be able to understand that. It is an issue on which I always agreed with Tam Dalyell - - his 'slippery slope' argument.You - and others - may disagree with the suggestion that the Devolution Legislation ought to be repealed, but it is a perfectly valid viewpoint and one held by many voters within Scotland itself. I am not actually arguing for such a policy , but any attempt at UDI would merit a firm response by Westminster - Holyrood can be suspended in the way that Stormont was in Spring 1972.
Arrogance and inflammatory nonsense
and link please for 'many Scots want Devolution repealed'
What is so outrageous about seeking to restore constitutional arrangements to how they existed for generations until twenty years ago?
This is clearly right. Enough Tory MPs believe a Corbyn government is less risky than No Deal Brexit. After the Deal is likely killed off, a new choice must be made, or the Government is VONC'd into a GE. No Deal isn't going to happen.
The chances of a referendum are, therefore, much higher than bookies allow?
I cannot see a referendum happening or legislation happening before March 29th.
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
I don't see why it should be messy. The EU can be prompt and sensible when it suits - see the swift ECJ judgement on revocation.
If HMG, via parliament, decides to go for a referendum, conference calls will be made to every EU capital, and Brussels, and it would be agreed in an afternoon. A50 will be extended as the Brits think again. The EU has absolutely nothing to lose, and a lot to gain (the UK humbled and returned to the fold, with all its money);
One of the most under-commented aspects of Brexit is how it has made the EU more united and how they have responded more quickly, professionally and in a co-ordinated way to its challenge than has the single country that is attempting to leave. The exchanges where the EU has asked us what we want and the UK has lamely asked for an offer reflect badly on our country.
True, but that is surely just a function of the fact that so many countries have handed so much autonomous power to an unelected eurocracy in Brussels. In things like trade negotiations, this autonomy is a huge advantage, they have economies of scale, vast experience, and don't have to answer, directly, to any voter. As Brexit is, in essence, one huge trade negotiation, they have proved, predictably, to be much better than us. This is what they do all day, for us it is a sudden shock, a one-off.
The trouble is when you look at the EU states - i.e. the real people - they are in a right old mess. France is in a state of emergency, Italy is rebelling, Germany's economy is shrinking, the East is in open war with Brussels, Greece is basically dead, and yet Brussels sails imperiously on. It is not an advert for the EU, it is arguably the opposite.
I don't think we are in any position to be throwing stones right now?
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could the bargain.
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The fannies will have little option to not agree. They will not want to be up in court , every country has a right to self determination. You bawheid.
Away you deluded half witted moronic idiot, Scotland bears no comparison to Catalonia. Scotland is and always has been a country. Would we just love to see those halfwits try that. PS: you are so thick that you don't know the union has no written constitution , the liars in Westminster make it up.
Emotionally, and despite being British, I have always held a fondness for Scotland and have some sympathy for its desire for independence. But, objectively, surely the huge challenges that the UK has ran into in trying to plot a course to divorce from the EU underlines how problematic separating Scotland from the UK would be? If I were Sturgeon I'd be spending a few years working up a credible plan in some detail, including paying a few visits to the Czechs and Slovaks?
I doubt she will get that long , a referendum is expected before next election or they will have issues
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that .
(Near) certainties in British politics:
1) The DUP will never vote for that Deal 2) The SNP will do well whenever the next GE is held
Pretty much everything else is completely up in the air.
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
You mean just like Spain was forced to agree to the demands of extremists in Catalonia? The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can
You insult and patronise the Scots. How dare you - no wonder they are marching towards Independence
A comment such as yours would be incendiary if my friends and family read it
Not at all. It is a perfectly legitimate view to hold. There is nothing extreme about suggesting that Devolution was a mistake , and any democrat should be able to understand that. It is an issue on which I always agreed with Tam Dalyell - - his 'slippery slope' argument.You - and others - may disagree with the suggestion that the Devolution Legislation ought to be repealed, but it is a perfectly valid viewpoint and one held by many voters within Scotland itself. I am not actually arguing for such a policy , but any attempt at UDI would merit a firm response by Westminster - Holyrood can be suspended in the way that Stormont was in Spring 1972.
Arrogance and inflammatory nonsense
and link please for 'many Scots want Devolution repealed'
What is so outrageous about seeking to restore constitutional arrangements to how they existed for generations until twenty years ago?
Evening all. I wonder if all this no deal planning will encourage Conservative remain leaning MPs to vote for a referendum rather than move them towards TMay’s deal as intended.
I rather fancy that the chances of A50 revocation have moved up a few notches today. Enough MPs might get the wind up if Mrs May's demonstration of controlled flight into terrain gets a bit too realistic.
I don’t think so. When May’s deal dies, we’re into a VNOC in the Gov which has to be prioritised. All the Remainers who want to get paid a lot of money for simply doing as Brussels tells them, then have a choice - show their true colours and help bring down the Gov, in which case we’re into a GE where most of them will lose their seats, or support May with no Plan B but no deal almost certain. They are in real mess which is no more than they deserve.
Your posts seem to display an element of panic as no deal disappears and even, as seems likely, brexit
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
When I worked in Scotland, the Scots I met weren’t ones to look gift horses in the mouth. Still, you didn’t care about your economy during the Independence referendum so it’s no surprise you don’t care for it now.
The FTPA means parliament can vote down a government without triggering a general election, and put in place a new PM within 14 days who can request an A50 extension.
Except Corbyn seems to like Brexit. He certainly is not putting any obstacles in its way
I studied revolutions for a term at university; Corbyn has been interested in them for a lifetime and surely knows the key point that the established order only collapses after a serious crisis affecting the wellbeing of ordinary citizens (normally the middle classes, rather than the peasants as you might think).
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I am amazed at how many posters think they know the Scots and ignore those of us who put the Scots case to them. We know Malc, both the conservatives and labour in Scotland would get a shellacking if there is an election anytime soon
I'm in Scotland, and I never hear about Brexit.
Why would you. Staying in, as wee Krankie wants, keeps us in the CFP which really hurts Scotland.
Very adult , the CFP has been given away already and is minor compared to the other damage.
You know you don't believe in the CFP - very adult indeed, you big humbug.
Bear in mind that in the 73 years since Attlee formed his government, the average PM tenure is about 5 years, so a 250/1 shot implies the sort of thing that happens less than once-a-millennium. Granted that there's much more flux at the moment and a change of PM is more likely that usual but I still think that 250/1 is more than fair.
On which note, I would have thought the 250/1 on the Lib Dems winning Most Seats at the next election represents value. There's a fair few steps needed but they're all more than possible.
Yes. In fact, I don't think there are all that many steps - though there are several scenarios through which it could .
Depends what you mean by the SNP doing'well'. I doubt they will poll better than circa 33% next time.
If we go to No Deal Scotland could be independent by next time
I am sure Westminster will have agreed to that!
The SNP will say it only requires the consent of the Scottish people
SNP can say what it likes but such an approach would cost them dearly..
Boy are you out of touch with opinion in Scotland.
You should see our timelines with our extensive family and friends in Scotland before pontificating on the Scots
An election any time soon would result in lost conservative seats and labour gone without trace
Not even the polls are suggesting that - and the SNP have consistently underperformed them for quite some time.
Given your network of reliable contacts, how did you explain the SNP losing 21 of its 56 seats in 2017?
Why not live in the past, though you southerners seem to all think you are Scottish experts. Keep dreaming. We saw your ilk today with Fatty Soames telling Ian Blackford to go home. Tories cannot help being nasty bas*****
I
I'm in Scotland, and I never hear about Brexit.
People are likely to be as sick to death of it there as elsewhere in the UK.
Comments
"Brexit: Theresa May to hold a series of MPs' votes on options"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46608952
Goals for 31, goals against 29, difference +62
Therefore there's one realistic option, revocation of Article 50.
I don't think an extension of Article 50 is an option because every country has a veto, and that could get messy.
Whatever the definition of One Nation Tory, Soubry is not it. She is just a rogue agent anyway at the moment because she knows that she has lost Broxtowe for the Tories at the next election and no other association in its right mind would touch her.
I completely agree. The UK will turn into a wasteland due to a shortage of Calcium hypochlorite or summat.
The Scottish Parliament only exists at all as a result of legislation passed by Westminster in 1997/98. Such legislation can be repealed if necessary. Certainly any unconstitutional action by the SNP would justify the suspension of Holyrood.
1. Vote through May's Deal
2. Exit the EU on March 29th and claim Brexit victory
3. Persuade May to step down soon after
4. Have an orderly leadership election in the summer and avoid electing an extremist
5. Call an autumn election on the back of that, before the next inevitable recession rolls in
Not impossbile for a well-organised party. (I don't expect the Tories to manage it.)
On the evidence so far the Prime Minister will try to get her deal through until it is actually impossible constitutionally, politically and practically to do so; it is the only realisable deal in town.
Has anyone given attention to the issue of whether she can carry on seeking to get it through AFTER the treaties cease to apply on 29th March? So far as I can see she can. If 30th March and a few days after proves to be anything like what people predict it would concentrate minds in the House of Commons quite a bit.
PS: you are so thick that you don't know the union has no written constitution , the liars in Westminster make it up.
I've consistently said I'm opposed to cancelling Brexit or calling another referendum until after we've left.
My comment was in response to SeanT discussing the odds/chances of another referendum.
But as an example of the sort of supply chain something a few milimetres square might have: one of our chips was fab'ed in China, sent to Austria for packaging, then to the US for testing, and to the UK and China for development/test and production respectively. It only takes one officious REMF at the border for the entire chain to come crashing down.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/illegal-migrants-will-rush-into-britain-under-chaos-of-nodeal-ministers-told-a4020351.html
The economic poop will hit the air conditioner prior to Brexit day.
After taking such a bold move a reckoning will be needed, and a General Election is in keeping with our constitutional traditions in a way that referendums simply aren't. If the voters disagree with Parliament then they can install a Brexit majority in the next HoC; if they agree (or aren't sufficiently moved one way or another) then they can let the politicians responsible for revocation get away with it and keep their seats.
The country's and Parliament's positions on the EU urgently need to be brought back into sync if we're even to begin to move on. This is the means to do it.
Me predicting Australia winning the next Ashes isn't the same as me wanting it to happen.
The problem is Parliament voting down "No Deal" means nothing if they also vote down the Deal. Nothing else matters - it is the Deal or leaving without a Deal - everything else is pointless obfuscation not worth Parliamentary time.
A comment such as yours would be incendiary if my friends and family read it
And she 'runs' all this from her laptop as if it was all on her hard drive.
Details are deliberately imprecise to protect her employer.
Have a referendum on having a referendum.
The Withdrawal Agreement was voted under QMV, an extension to Article 50 would not, every country would have a veto.
Speaking from a purely selfish point PB is at its best when we've got an election/referendum to focus on.
That we are in the realms of asking these questions if only to dismiss them is the key issue here.
Absolutely bizarre.
Lump on Man City at 1.47 on BFEx, and have a look at the handicap markets too.
This is going to be a miserable match in the rain.
and link please for 'many Scots want Devolution repealed'
I'm incredibly lucky.