Just recall the insults and the clamour a few days ago for Tory MPs who had had the temerity to organise to challenge May's leadership to be thrown out of the party. Yet now, some of the supposed loyalists who were throwing the mud are showing that they are anything but.
Surely Ken Clarke is another. He would never support No Deal. And God bless him.
Ken is one of the (very) few MPs who have been consistent - voted against invoking Article 50 - unlike the very many now complaining of a sub-optimal outcome but who voted for it nonetheless.
question: if by some miracle TM manages to get approval for her WA from commons, then the DUP decide to pull plug and government falls due to VONC , could a successor PM choose to renege on the WA if they feel the EU is not acting in good faith with the FTA negotiations and declare no deal and repeal WA?
This is after the UK has left, right? Sure, the UK is a sovereign state and it can withdraw from treaties that it's signed.
However, 1) Showing yourself to be rampantly untrustworthy isn't a good thing to be doing when trying to negotiate treaties with other countries 2) The UK's geographical situation for having this kind of fight with the EU is not advantageous, to put it mildly...
So I post it because it is a fact - and I suppose in the hope it will annoy a few people like you.
OK, let me rephrase. Any chance we could ask you to refrain from writing total bullshit, that you know to be total bullshit? It would be nice to get a bit more signal and a bit less noise.
Perhaps you could post the text from the Belfast agreement which refutes Mr Tyndall's 'total bullshit'?
It sounds like a dystopian Love Actually where Huge Grant goes to Heathrow and blocks enterance to the immigrant half of couples in time for Christmas.
This is one area TM and I are not on the same page along with the tens of thousands pledge. In any successful economy we need immigration and making it difficult is anti business
However, when and if we arrive at brexit, the rules on immigration will follow TM handing over
The latest ONS data shows over 300k immigrants during the last year while also showing that the number of immigrants in work has fallen.
How does that sort of immigration make the economy successful ?
We are nearly at full employment and the NHS, care and hospitality sector need immigration to function
Please read what I said instead of burbling the establishment line.
That we are near full employment yet so few new immigrants are finding work makes the issue especially pertinent.
Now how do immigrants who don't work but use public services help the NHS ?
Over 75% of immigrants in the past year are non-EU. If the government want to stop that it could (it could have stopped it years ago). It's not going to be solved by Brexit.
Indeed.
That the government's immigration management is a total shambles isn't the fault of the EU or the last Labour government or Jeremy Corbyn or Nick Clegg or whoever.
Its the fault of this government and nobody more so that Theresa May.
I was playing with some numbers a few days ago, and was looking at economic activity rates for newly arrived non-EU migrants
Are there breakdowns of their demographics or reasons for settlement? If its a lot of 'Family Reunion" cases of "mothers with young children" then that could explain the difference. Unless we can compare 'working age' arrivals I'm not sure what conclusions we can draw.
I like the split superstructure - makes sense from an operational point of view and stops her looking top heavy - form following function.
RAF harmony rules which makes long blue water deployments of the air wing impossible.
In layman terms?
In the Fleet Air Arm the air wing used to deploy with the carrier until the cruise is over, war is won or we can no longer stand up due to multiple STDs. The QNLZ air wing operates under RAF rules which means a maximum of 3 months. So when she goes on her Pacific deployment in 2020 they will probably rotate out the entire air wing at KL or Fremantle and fly in a fresh batch of drivers and fixers from the UK with all that implies for lack of continuity and operational effectiveness.
It sounds like a dystopian Love Actually where Huge Grant goes to Heathrow and blocks enterance to the immigrant half of couples in time for Christmas.
This is one area TM and I are not on the same page along with the tens of thousands pledge. In any successful economy we need immigration and making it difficult is anti business
However, when and if we arrive at brexit, the rules on immigration will follow TM handing over
The latest ONS data shows over 300k immigrants during the last year while also showing that the number of immigrants in work has fallen.
How does that sort of immigration make the economy successful ?
We are nearly at full employment and the NHS, care and hospitality sector need immigration to function
Please read what I said instead of burbling the establishment line.
That we are near full employment yet so few new immigrants are finding work makes the issue especially pertinent.
Now how do immigrants who don't work but use public services help the NHS ?
Over 75% of immigrants in the past year are non-EU. If the government want to stop that it could (it could have stopped it years ago). It's not going to be solved by Brexit.
Indeed.
That the government's immigration management is a total shambles isn't the fault of the EU or the last Labour government or Jeremy Corbyn or Nick Clegg or whoever.
Its the fault of this government and nobody more so that Theresa May.
I was playing with some numbers a few days ago, and was looking at economic activity rates for newly arrived non-EU migrants* (i.e. the number that were in work). They peaked in about 1995-96, got worse in a straight line from 1997 to about 2003. They then flat-lined until 2009, before a slight improvement through to 2012. They have then got worse and worse and worse.
That's not a great achievement for... for.. what's their name???
* There's a proviso here: they assume that all non-EU migrants that started in work stayed in work, and those who started out of work stayed out of work. This clearly isn't true, but there isn't enough granularity to see exactly who was working. And I suspect my numbers are broadly correct.
Several cabinet sources played down the prospect of any efforts to try to form a coalition of support with Labour MPs and said all efforts were focused on regaining the DUP’s support.
“You cannot get this deal through only on the back of Labour votes because it would split the Tory party,” one official said. “That means one thing – bringing the DUP back on board.”
Conservative party deliberately crashing the UK on the rock of No Deal because they don't want to talk to Labour.
Just recall the insults and the clamour a few days ago for Tory MPs who had had the temerity to organise to challenge May's leadership to be thrown out of the party. Yet now, some of the supposed loyalists who were throwing the mud are showing that they are anything but.
Surely Ken Clarke is another. He would never support No Deal. And God bless him.
Ken is one of the (very) few MPs who have been consistent - voted against invoking Article 50 - unlike the very many now complaining of a sub-optimal outcome but who voted for it nonetheless.
I like the split superstructure - makes sense from an operational point of view and stops her looking top heavy - form following function.
RAF harmony rules which makes long blue water deployments of the air wing impossible.
In layman terms?
In the Fleet Air Arm the air wing used to deploy with the carrier until the cruise is over, war is won or we can no longer stand up due to multiple STDs. The QNLZ air wing operates under RAF rules which means a maximum of 3 months. So when she goes on her Pacific deployment in 2020 they will probably rotate out the entire air wing at KL or Fremantle and fly in a fresh batch of drivers and fixers from the UK with all that implies for lack of continuity and operational effectiveness.
Thanks. Does seem a bit not "joined up" - are the RAF the only service with this '3 months away max'?
is there any circumstance now whereby No Deal can still occur since ECJ verdict and numbers in commons against no deal, and if not, why so much talk of it and spending of serious taxpayers money preparing for something that is no longer possible?
Of course it's possible, it's all very well being opposed to no deal, but it's the default position unless MPs agree something else soon. tick tock...
What is worrying me is that the point (that "no deal" will happen automatically unless the MPs vote for something else) has been repeated so often that it brings into question why MPs don't get it. I remind you of Viewcode's typology: MPs are a) stupid, b) malevolent, or c) distanced.
So I post it because it is a fact - and I suppose in the hope it will annoy a few people like you.
OK, let me rephrase. Any chance we could ask you to refrain from writing total bullshit, that you know to be total bullshit? It would be nice to get a bit more signal and a bit less noise.
Perhaps you could post the text from the Belfast agreement which refutes Mr Tyndall's 'total bullshit'?
The total bullshit was the claim that the backstop would mean NI was no longer in the UK. Do you want to defend this claim?
Several cabinet sources played down the prospect of any efforts to try to form a coalition of support with Labour MPs and said all efforts were focused on regaining the DUP’s support.
“You cannot get this deal through only on the back of Labour votes because it would split the Tory party,” one official said. “That means one thing – bringing the DUP back on board.”
Conservative party deliberately crashing the UK on the rock of No Deal because they don't want to talk to Labour.
May's deal probably doesn't need to actually win, at first pass - just do better than any of the other options put and defeated in amendments or indicative votes. Then it will go through at second pass.
I think that's what's known in the trade as "a lie".
Why do you so often resort to the word lie
The article makes sense and is predicated on the DUP accepting whatever TM brings back
It may well be optimistic, but lie - no
If the whips claim to be within 20 votes, that means they must believe they've somehow managed to convince 117 people, including the ERG and arch-remainers, to a man, to fall in line, even though nothing substantive has change, beyond the PM making an arse of herself in Brussels.
Now, it's possible they actually believe that, in which case the chief whip is an even bigger moron than he looks, but the simplest explanation is that it's total nonsense. A lie, told for the reason @kle4 said.
Nothing has changed, materially, for anyone to reconsider their opinion. It doesn't look like anything will change, either.
Of course things have changed; the MPs are slowly reassessing as the views from their constituents and other stakeholders such as businesses seep through. This will be particularly true for the ultras, who will have received a lot of stick both for their obstinacy and incompetence what with last week's goings on. PB isn't the only place where people will have deduced that Brexit hangs on accepting the deal.
We'll know it's true when the mood music starts to change on ConHome, the nutters' last redoubt (other than the comments under DM articles, I guess)
So I post it because it is a fact - and I suppose in the hope it will annoy a few people like you.
OK, let me rephrase. Any chance we could ask you to refrain from writing total bullshit, that you know to be total bullshit? It would be nice to get a bit more signal and a bit less noise.
Perhaps you could post the text from the Belfast agreement which refutes Mr Tyndall's 'total bullshit'?
The total bullshit was the claim that the backstop would mean NI was no longer in the UK. Do you want to defend this claim?
So part of Mr Tyndall’s claim was bullshit, not all of it - so perhaps using the word “total” was unhelpful.
Several cabinet sources played down the prospect of any efforts to try to form a coalition of support with Labour MPs and said all efforts were focused on regaining the DUP’s support.
“You cannot get this deal through only on the back of Labour votes because it would split the Tory party,” one official said. “That means one thing – bringing the DUP back on board.”
Conservative party deliberately crashing the UK on the rock of No Deal because they don't want to talk to Labour.
May's deal probably doesn't need to actually win, at first pass - just do better than any of the other options put and defeated in amendments or indicative votes. Then it will go through at second pass.
The Deal loses by a chunk but not catastrophically. All other options have failed. Labour moves VONC - it fails. The deal passes with non trivial opposition abstentions helping it over the line.
I think that's what's known in the trade as "a lie".
Why do you so often resort to the word lie
The article makes sense and is predicated on the DUP accepting whatever TM brings back
It may well be optimistic, but lie - no
If the whips claim to be within 20 votes, that means they must believe they've somehow managed to convince 117 people, including the ERG and arch-remainers, to a man, to fall in line, even though nothing substantive has change, beyond the PM making an arse of herself in Brussels.
Now, it's possible they actually believe that, in which case the chief whip is an even bigger moron than he looks, but the simplest explanation is that it's total nonsense. A lie, told for the reason @kle4 said.
Nothing has changed, materially, for anyone to reconsider their opinion. It doesn't look like anything will change, either.
Of course things have changed; the MPs are slowly reassessing as the views from their constituents and other stakeholders such as businesses seep through. This will be particularly true for the ultras, who will have received a lot of stick both for their obstinacy and incompetence what with last week's goings on. PB isn't the only place where people will have deduced that Brexit hangs on accepting the deal.
We'll know it's true when the mood music starts to change on ConHome, the nutters' last redoubt (other than the comments under DM articles, I guess)
Perhaps Theresa May will enjoy Christmas after all. For today came the first faint signs in the Commons that she has weathered the storm.
Her Eurosceptic opponents on her own benches no longer sound so irreconcilable, so determined to push the argument to an actual rupture in the Conservative Party.
The people who sounded intransigeant were the supporters of a second referendum. Again and again they demanded that the Prime Minister stop “running down the clock” and threatening them with a choice between her deal and no deal.
They are the ones who are being driven mad by the fear that May is going to cheat them of their longed-for prize. In their voices could be heard an undertone of hysteria, inadequately concealed by their angry protestations that they believe in democracy and the Prime Minister does not.
Several cabinet sources played down the prospect of any efforts to try to form a coalition of support with Labour MPs and said all efforts were focused on regaining the DUP’s support.
“You cannot get this deal through only on the back of Labour votes because it would split the Tory party,” one official said. “That means one thing – bringing the DUP back on board.”
Conservative party deliberately crashing the UK on the rock of No Deal because they don't want to talk to Labour.
Although clearly Brexit should've been a cross-party project from the outset, so the Tories are the main culprits, Labour don't get off scot-free: Corbyn's position is pure politicking. Labour should be supporting the withdrawal agreement; as it is they too can be accused of "crashing the UK on the rock of No Deal".
In summary: they're (nearly) all as bad as each other.
New petition: Charge the costs of no-deal Brexit preparations to Members of Parliament. https://t.co/YRth7nch8O
French police may be next to strike. Unions in heated discussions with govt over terms and conditions. main sticking point is 275 million euros of over time owed to officers which still hasnt been paid.as state says its not in budget.
I think that's what's known in the trade as "a lie".
Why do you so often resort to the word lie
The article makes sense and is predicated on the DUP accepting whatever TM brings back
It may well be optimistic, but lie - no
If the whips claim to be within 20 votes, that means they must believe they've somehow managed to convince 117 people, including the ERG and arch-remainers, to a man, to fall in line, even though nothing substantive has change, beyond the PM making an arse of herself in Brussels.
Now, it's possible they actually believe that, in which case the chief whip is an even bigger moron than he looks, but the simplest explanation is that it's total nonsense. A lie, told for the reason @kle4 said.
Nothing has changed, materially, for anyone to reconsider their opinion. It doesn't look like anything will change, either.
Of course things have changed; the MPs are slowly reassessing as the views from their constituents and other stakeholders such as businesses seep through. This will be particularly true for the ultras, who will have received a lot of stick both for their obstinacy and incompetence what with last week's goings on. PB isn't the only place where people will have deduced that Brexit hangs on accepting the deal.
We'll know it's true when the mood music starts to change on ConHome, the nutters' last redoubt (other than the comments under DM articles, I guess)
Perhaps Theresa May will enjoy Christmas after all. For today came the first faint signs in the Commons that she has weathered the storm.
Her Eurosceptic opponents on her own benches no longer sound so irreconcilable, so determined to push the argument to an actual rupture in the Conservative Party.
The people who sounded intransigeant were the supporters of a second referendum. Again and again they demanded that the Prime Minister stop “running down the clock” and threatening them with a choice between her deal and no deal.
They are the ones who are being driven mad by the fear that May is going to cheat them of their longed-for prize. In their voices could be heard an undertone of hysteria, inadequately concealed by their angry protestations that they believe in democracy and the Prime Minister does not.
French police may be next to strike. Unions in heated discussions with govt over terms and conditions. main sticking point is 275 million euros of over time owed to officers which still hasnt been paid.as state says its not in budget.
Comments
However,
1) Showing yourself to be rampantly untrustworthy isn't a good thing to be doing when trying to negotiate treaties with other countries
2) The UK's geographical situation for having this kind of fight with the EU is not advantageous, to put it mildly...
https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/1075182354182868992
Several cabinet sources played down the prospect of any efforts to try to form a coalition of support with Labour MPs and said all efforts were focused on regaining the DUP’s support.
“You cannot get this deal through only on the back of Labour votes because it would split the Tory party,” one official said. “That means one thing – bringing the DUP back on board.”
Conservative party deliberately crashing the UK on the rock of No Deal because they don't want to talk to Labour.
The history books will see him right.
https://twitter.com/DaveClark_AFP/status/1072120428011884552
We'll know it's true when the mood music starts to change on ConHome, the nutters' last redoubt (other than the comments under DM articles, I guess)
The Deal loses by a chunk but not catastrophically.
All other options have failed.
Labour moves VONC - it fails.
The deal passes with non trivial opposition abstentions helping it over the line.
Her Eurosceptic opponents on her own benches no longer sound so irreconcilable, so determined to push the argument to an actual rupture in the Conservative Party.
The people who sounded intransigeant were the supporters of a second referendum. Again and again they demanded that the Prime Minister stop “running down the clock” and threatening them with a choice between her deal and no deal.
They are the ones who are being driven mad by the fear that May is going to cheat them of their longed-for prize. In their voices could be heard an undertone of hysteria, inadequately concealed by their angry protestations that they believe in democracy and the Prime Minister does not.
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/12/andrew-gimsons-commons-sketch-may-will-perhaps-be-able-to-enjoy-christmas-after-all.html
In summary: they're (nearly) all as bad as each other.
New petition: Charge the costs of no-deal Brexit preparations to Members of Parliament. https://t.co/YRth7nch8O
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/lion-air-and-boeing-are-heading-into-a-30b-feud-20181217-p50mnb.html
French police may be next to strike. Unions in heated discussions with govt over terms and conditions. main sticking point is 275 million euros of over time owed to officers which still hasnt been paid.as state says its not in budget.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2018/12/18/01016-20181218ARTFIG00270-police-castaner-tente-d-apaiser-la-grogne.php
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2018/12/18/01003-20181218ARTFIG00317-le-premier-ministre-belge-charles-michel-presente-sa-demission.php
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/hauliers-fear-brexit-nightmare-as-irish-ferries-may-axe-rosslare-france-route-1.3735996
I had to laugh