I do wonder if extension is unlikely now and it'll be either revocation (followed by referendum, presumably) or nothing.
I'm still of the opinion that the likely options (in descending order) are:
1. No Deal 2. Realignment, Revocation, General Election 3. Labour moderates blink: Deal, General Election
Followed by the unlikely options:
4. Government falls in January, March General Election, then who knows? 5. Realignment, A50 extension granted, Referendum, implement result, General Election
No, some variant of 3 is still most likely; some of the Tory antis are well on their way to blinking already. Next are the 'political' options embraced by your 2, 4 and 5. 1 is still bottom.
Throwing a wobbly on Twitter is one thing. Actually taking concrete action is quite another.
Eh?
I know this is hard to credit, but people making noises off about taking drastic action in the event of some hypothetical situation coming to pass aren't guaranteed to follow through with their threats 100% of the time. Besides, I think only 3 or 4 Tory antis have been suggesting that they'd resign the whip over No Deal: even if all of them really were willing to bring down the Government it still wouldn't be enough.
Labour Europhiles lending their votes, in effect, to prop up a Conservative administration is also a very big deal.
There are substantial barriers to a realignment, but it's even more difficult to see how MPs from one side act unilaterally and then escape punishment at the General Election which is highly likely to follow.
I think we are beyond the point where MPs can expect to avoid any punishment?
But I can see May as you suggest somehow ploughing on regardless. I think we will get the deal one way or another.
Is HMQ inviting Jezza one constitutional step too far?
I'm starting to think May's deal is the least worst option. A brief exit into the penalty box, realisation that unicorn cake was a delusion after all, then back in properly
Welcome aboard.
Of course it is the least worst option.
Better one sinner...
Rubbish , why go through all that crap to help the Tory clowns. Just get on with revoking A50 and get these morons out of office, a cardboard cutout could do a better job.
Morning Malcolm, hope the turnips are OK up there.
And I trust the root vegetables are in rude health as well
Morning Ydoethur, Most of them seem to be in Westminster and surrounding areas, though some of the really rotten ones have been left up here.
The problem of the Scottish Parliament in a nut shell.
Morning Malc.
Morning David, Agree , hard to believe but Holyrood has even bigger duffers than Westminster. It is hideous to watch them at times, you wonder how they managed to fill in the forms to stand for election
But I can see May as you suggest somehow ploughing on regardless. I think we will get the deal one way or another.
Is HMQ inviting Jezza one constitutional step too far?
I'm starting to think May's deal is the least worst option. A brief exit into the penalty box, realisation that unicorn cake was a delusion after all, then back in properly
Welcome aboard.
Of course it is the least worst option.
Better one sinner...
Rubbish , why go through all that crap to help the Tory clowns. Just get on with revoking A50 and get these morons out of office, a cardboard cutout could do a better job.
Morning Malcolm, hope the turnips are OK up there.
And I trust the root vegetables are in rude health as well
Morning Ydoethur, Most of them seem to be in Westminster and surrounding areas, though some of the really rotten ones have been left up here.
The problem of the Scottish Parliament in a nut shell.
Morning Malc.
Morning David, Agree , hard to believe but Holyrood has even bigger duffers than Westminster. It is hideous to watch them at times, you wonder how they managed to fill in the forms to stand for election
Now that really is quite hard to believe.
Or would be, if the Welsh Assembly wasn't worse again.
On the drones my guess is that Gatwick used that Israeli drone tracking radar thingy to follow it back to whoever was controlling it. Good job, if a little slow.
What's the likely sentence?. I think 5 yrs would not go amiss, given what they have done and how many people it has affected. An exemplary sentence, just like after the riots.
Five years, but watching The Last Jedi twice a day so they really get how boring and frustrating it was for those people at Gatwick.
Something much more devastating. Make them watch every episode of EastEnders right from the start. That'd take about 5 yrs one would think.
Now hang on. There's punishment and there's torture...
If they ran out of time.. there's always that soap set on the Spanish Riviera... Eldorado.. just in case they need it...
I've been doing the maths, and it doesn't work. There have been 5829 episodes of Eastenders. Given the overwhelming majority are half an hour, that's about 3,000 hours of footage. Assuming twelve hours a day of watching, that's only 230 days. What are they supposed to do for the rest of their 1826 day sentence?
Repeats?
Well there's Coronation St , Brookside, Home and Away, Howards way. Mrs Dales Diary.. the list of awfulness is almost endless.,...
On the drones my guess is that Gatwick used that Israeli drone tracking radar thingy to follow it back to whoever was controlling it. Good job, if a little slow.
What's the likely sentence?. I think 5 yrs would not go amiss, given what they have done and how many people it has affected. An exemplary sentence, just like after the riots.
Five years, but watching The Last Jedi twice a day so they really get how boring and frustrating it was for those people at Gatwick.
Something much more devastating. Make them watch every episode of EastEnders right from the start. That'd take about 5 yrs one would think.
Now hang on. There's punishment and there's torture...
If they ran out of time.. there's always that soap set on the Spanish Riviera... Eldorado.. just in case they need it...
I've been doing the maths, and it doesn't work. There have been 5829 episodes of Eastenders. Given the overwhelming majority are half an hour, that's about 3,000 hours of footage. Assuming twelve hours a day of watching, that's only 230 days. What are they supposed to do for the rest of their 1826 day sentence?
Repeats?
Well there's Coronation St , Brookside, Home and Away, Howards way. Mrs Dales Diary.. the list of awfulness is almost endless.,...
and there is no real need to show them in sequence. Make it random.
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
I'm not sure a General Election fixes it either, though. If the Tories win you reelect the same MPs who won't pass the deal now. Would they pass it then? Or maybe you get Corbyn, whose approach to Brexit is the same as TMay's but without the honesty and decisiveness.
But at least an election flushes them out and a manifesto is as much a commitment as a referendum result.
I know this is hard to credit, but people making noises off about taking drastic action in the event of some hypothetical situation coming to pass aren't guaranteed to follow through with their threats 100% of the time. Besides, I think only 3 or 4 Tory antis have been suggesting that they'd resign the whip over No Deal: even if all of them really were willing to bring down the Government it still wouldn't be enough.
Labour Europhiles lending their votes, in effect, to prop up a Conservative administration is also a very big deal.
There are substantial barriers to a realignment, but it's even more difficult to see how MPs from one side act unilaterally and then escape punishment at the General Election which is highly likely to follow.
I think we are beyond the point where MPs can expect to avoid any punishment?
My point is that if one major party disintegrates it is liable to be routed by the other. That fact, and the ties of loyalty inherent in politics (most of these Parliamentarians will have been in the same tribe for decades, and draw much of their social circle from it,) together generate considerable inertia.
Instances of MPs crossing the floor are unusual, and previous instances of formal splits are salutary. As we know, Labour was crippled and lost three successive elections after the Gang of Four broke away; before that, the Liberal Party was virtually destroyed by schism.
No Deal simply seems the most likely outcome to me because there is no majority in this Parliament for any course of action, save possibly for Revocation - and that would either require MPs on both sides to break communion with their colleagues, or for one side to collapse and throw most of its members' careers on the funeral pyre in the process.
But Hell, we're all just guessing at this juncture: I like to say that I'm reasonably sure that the DUP will never back the Deal, and that the SNP ought to do well whenever the next GE happens, but apart from that nothing is easily predictable. I might well turn out to be completely wrong in my assumptions.
May's deal fulfils the mandate given in the referendum which was very specifically and exclusively "to leave the European Union". Thats leave covered off. So when MPs are unable to proceed forwards having voted the deal down then a referendum is all thats left.
Can't have a General Election because both parties are led by a leader the MPs don't trust and don't want them leading into a General Election, with the prospect of manifesto commitments that most of them profoundly disagree.
So an affirming vote. We had a referendum on a concept - to leave the EU. We also now know that the referendum was corrupted by illegal money and would have been declared void had it been a parliamentary election. So a 2nd vote this time on a specific proposal seems reasonable and an AFFIRMATION of democracy when money corrupted the last campaign.
Mays Deal. Or Remain. With an A50 extension until the vote can be carried out and a commitment to the EU that we will enact the result the day after.
What far left control of the Labour party has delivered is a relaxed tolerance of anti-Semitism and active support for Brexit. It’s genuinely bizarre that so many members and MPs fail to see what is staring them squarely in the face. Denial is such a powerful force, I guess.
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
I'm not sure a General Election fixes it either, though. If the Tories win you reelect the same MPs who won't pass the deal now. Would they pass it then? Or maybe you get Corbyn, whose approach to Brexit is the same as TMay's but without the honesty and decisiveness.
But at least an election flushes them out and a manifesto is as much a commitment as a referendum result.
May's deal fulfils the mandate given in the referendum which was very specifically and exclusively "to leave the European Union". Thats leave covered off. So when MPs are unable to proceed forwards having voted the deal down then a referendum is all thats left.
Can't have a General Election because both parties are led by a leader the MPs don't trust and don't want them leading into a General Election, with the prospect of manifesto commitments that most of them profoundly disagree.
So an affirming vote. We had a referendum on a concept - to leave the EU. We also now know that the referendum was corrupted by illegal money and would have been declared void had it been a parliamentary election. So a 2nd vote this time on a specific proposal seems reasonable and an AFFIRMATION of democracy when money corrupted the last campaign.
Mays Deal. Or Remain. With an A50 extension until the vote can be carried out and a commitment to the EU that we will enact the result the day after.
If we take it as a given that the EU would agree to such a thing, it would nonetheless require a Parliamentary majority and a friendly Prime Minister (in order to extend A50, pass a referendum bill and amend all the Brexit legislation) to pass.
Corbyn and May both want the result of the first referendum to stand, and the sitting Prime Minister in particular has been very consistent in stating that there should not be a second vote. So if Parliament wants to hold a second referendum then it has about eleven weeks left after it returns in the New Year to execute some kind of political realignment, vote in the required compromise PM, draft all the new legislation and secure agreement to an A50 extension from 27 EU Governments. Doable, but not easy.
What far left control of the Labour party has delivered is a relaxed tolerance of anti-Semitism and active support for Brexit. It’s genuinely bizarre that so many members and MPs fail to see what is staring them squarely in the face. Denial is such a powerful force, I guess.
That, and a good many of them are more afraid of a repeat of the SDP than they are of Brexit, perhaps?
May's deal fulfils the mandate given in the referendum which was very specifically and exclusively "to leave the European Union". Thats leave covered off. So when MPs are unable to proceed forwards having voted the deal down then a referendum is all thats left.
Can't have a General Election because both parties are led by a leader the MPs don't trust and don't want them leading into a General Election, with the prospect of manifesto commitments that most of them profoundly disagree.
So an affirming vote. We had a referendum on a concept - to leave the EU. We also now know that the referendum was corrupted by illegal money and would have been declared void had it been a parliamentary election. So a 2nd vote this time on a specific proposal seems reasonable and an AFFIRMATION of democracy when money corrupted the last campaign.
Mays Deal. Or Remain. With an A50 extension until the vote can be carried out and a commitment to the EU that we will enact the result the day after.
If we take it as a given that the EU would agree to such a thing, it would nonetheless require a Parliamentary majority and a friendly Prime Minister (in order to extend A50, pass a referendum bill and amend all the Brexit legislation) to pass.
Corbyn and May both want the result of the first referendum to stand, and the sitting Prime Minister in particular has been very consistent in stating that there should not be a second vote. So if Parliament wants to hold a second referendum then it has about eleven weeks left after it returns in the New Year to execute some kind of political realignment, vote in the required compromise PM, draft all the new legislation and secure agreement to an A50 extension from 27 EU Governments. Doable, but not easy.
We don't need a new PM - May will call the referendum. Its her deal or the highway she says. Her deal delivers the referendum mandate she says. Is the Will of the People she says. And that Will of the People is being frustrated by MPs. So the only solution left is to have the people impose their will on MPs - a referendum on her specific deal.
Who cares whether she said no referendum. She said no election. She's a proven liar.
But I can see May as you suggest somehow ploughing on regardless. I think we will get the deal one way or another.
Is HMQ inviting Jezza one constitutional step too far?
I'm starting to think May's deal is the least worst option. A brief exit into the penalty box, realisation that unicorn cake was a delusion after all, then back in properly
Welcome aboard.
Of course it is the least worst option.
Better one sinner...
Rubbish , why go through all that crap to help the Tory clowns. Just get on with revoking A50 and get these morons out of office, a cardboard cutout could do a better job.
Morning Malcolm, hope the turnips are OK up there.
And I trust the root vegetables are in rude health as well
Morning Ydoethur, Most of them seem to be in Westminster and surrounding areas, though some of the really rotten ones have been left up here.
The problem of the Scottish Parliament in a nut shell.
Morning Malc.
Morning David, Agree , hard to believe but Holyrood has even bigger duffers than Westminster. It is hideous to watch them at times, you wonder how they managed to fill in the forms to stand for election
Now that really is quite hard to believe.
Or would be, if the Welsh Assembly wasn't worse again.
Seems absolute uselessness is a prerequisite for politicians nowadays.
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
I'm not sure a General Election fixes it either, though. If the Tories win you reelect the same MPs who won't pass the deal now. Would they pass it then? Or maybe you get Corbyn, whose approach to Brexit is the same as TMay's but without the honesty and decisiveness.
But at least an election flushes them out and a manifesto is as much a commitment as a referendum result.
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
I'm not sure a General Election fixes it either, though. If the Tories win you reelect the same MPs who won't pass the deal now. Would they pass it then? Or maybe you get Corbyn, whose approach to Brexit is the same as TMay's but without the honesty and decisiveness.
But at least an election flushes them out and a manifesto is as much a commitment as a referendum result.
Probably can't sue them for not following a referendum either mind.
Probably not a lot we can sue them for, given how they get rewarded very well for incompetence. If we vote them out, they still get a golden handshake and maybe a Knighthood!
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
I'm not sure a General Election fixes it either, though. If the Tories win you reelect the same MPs who won't pass the deal now. Would they pass it then? Or maybe you get Corbyn, whose approach to Brexit is the same as TMay's but without the honesty and decisiveness.
But at least an election flushes them out and a manifesto is as much a commitment as a referendum result.
Probably can't sue them for not following a referendum either mind.
Probably not a lot we can sue them for, given how they get rewarded very well for incompetence. If we vote them out, they still get a golden handshake and maybe a Knighthood!
The idea could sound attractive but I think it would just end up with us having even worse politicians. Whilst trying to get rid of bad politicians we may end up putting off good ones.
Corbyn believes in Marx. He wants not only Brexit but crash Brexit. He sees many advantages: 1. A crisis in Capitalism allows the intelligentsia (him, Diane Abbott, Richard Burgeon) to lead the proles to the victory of True Socialism 2. The EU is the embodiment of capitalist evil and would stop his plans to renationalise BA 3. Everyone agrees with him and will blame the personal disaster brought down on them by him on the Tories, this delivering a Commons majority for Labour of 704 in the next election
For my part in this, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa
On point 2, just to note that Leeds Central CLP passed a motion calling for the renationalisation of BA. I voted against. I don't recall which way Hilary Benn voted.
Only slightly off-topic, but I watched the PBS programme on the 1962 Cuban missile crisis last night and thought it both excellent and chilling about how near we came to nuclear war.
On October 27th an American surveillance pilot was shot down and killed over Cuba, a Soviet nuclear submarine armed its torpedoes, and …. Fidel Castro, the hero of the left, contacted Kruschev, saying Cuba was prepared to die for Socialism and the USSR should immediately launch its nuclear weapons at the American mainland.
The American military unanimously advised Kennedy to nuke Cuba.
Fortunately, Kruschev concluded that Fidel was unhinged, and Kennedy stood firm. Both were right. Kennedy made Trump look like an amateur when it came to women, but he had judgment, and Fidel was as crazy as a shithouse rat.
We have Donald and Vlad. But the greatest risk to mankind is global warming, according to Attenborough.
May's deal fulfils the mandate given in the referendum which was very specifically and exclusively "to leave the European Union". Thats leave covered off. So when MPs are unable to proceed forwards having voted the deal down then a referendum is all thats left.
Can't have a General Election because both parties are led by a leader the MPs don't trust and don't want them leading into a General Election, with the prospect of manifesto commitments that most of them profoundly disagree.
So an affirming vote. We had a referendum on a concept - to leave the EU. We also now know that the referendum was corrupted by illegal money and would have been declared void had it been a parliamentary election. So a 2nd vote this time on a specific proposal seems reasonable and an AFFIRMATION of democracy when money corrupted the last campaign.
Mays Deal. Or Remain. With an A50 extension until the vote can be carried out and a commitment to the EU that we will enact the result the day after.
If we take it as a given that the EU would agree to such a thing, it would nonetheless require a Parliamentary majority and a friendly Prime Minister (in order to extend A50, pass a referendum bill and amend all the Brexit legislation) to pass.
Corbyn and May both want the result of the first referendum to stand, and the sitting Prime Minister in particular has been very consistent in stating that there should not be a second vote. So if Parliament wants to hold a second referendum then it has about eleven weeks left after it returns in the New Year to execute some kind of political realignment, vote in the required compromise PM, draft all the new legislation and secure agreement to an A50 extension from 27 EU Governments. Doable, but not easy.
The longer May kicks the can down the road to prevent the above, the better. The decision to leave the EU on 29/3/19 has been made (by the people's vote on 23/6/16 and Parliament by sanctioning A50 in March 2017) and should stand, whether its the deal or no deal - these are the only 2 realistic options on the table.
Thanks as always for the article, David and as always I disagree with large parts of it.
Where are the Conservatives who will refuse to support their Government in a Vote of Confidence in the Commons? Voting against the Government on a free vote, a one line whip or on a local issue are one thing but this is as fundamental as it gets.
Any Conservative voting against their own Government on such a motion (as well as any Opposition MP voting for it) doesn't just risk expulsion but positively invites it. Ivan Lewis has no such fears as he was left the Labour Party and is probably well aware he now faces a Labour candidate if he chooses to stand in Bury again as an Independent.
Is there a single Conservative prepared to risk everything by either abstaining (also significant given the current Parliamentary arithmetic) or actively opposing the Government in a Confidence vote? So far, the ERG and the pro-REMAIN group have huffed and puffed but neither has dared to leave the tent.
To leave the party means a loss of livelihood, status and friendships - it's a big deal. It's not the same if you are a local Councillor - you might get back as an Independent particularly in the current mood but for an MP, it's a whole different thing.
I can't see the Conservatives abdicating the field to Corbyn even for a minute - if the WA falls on January the whenever, I suspect May will shrug and try again but if it goes down twice, she will either resign (which she should) or say that as the will of the Commons has been to reject the WA, the Government will move toward a managed No Deal and that will be the point when we will see if the Cabinet will move against her or acquiesce.
Corbyn believes in Marx. He wants not only Brexit but crash Brexit. He sees many advantages: 1. A crisis in Capitalism allows the intelligentsia (him, Diane Abbott, Richard Burgeon) to lead the proles to the victory of True Socialism 2. The EU is the embodiment of capitalist evil and would stop his plans to renationalise BA 3. Everyone agrees with him and will blame the personal disaster brought down on them by him on the Tories, this delivering a Commons majority for Labour of 704 in the next election
For my part in this, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa
On point 2, just to note that Leeds Central CLP passed a motion calling for the renationalisation of BA. I voted against. I don't recall which way Hilary Benn voted.
Did the motion pass?state ownership is not really that big an issue under Single Market. As countries can’t give state aid (in its many guises) anymore so they have to stand on their own two feet and wouldn’t be allowed to operate as a monopoly.
Thanks as always for the article, David and as always I disagree with large parts of it.
Where are the Conservatives who will refuse to support their Government in a Vote of Confidence in the Commons? Voting against the Government on a free vote, a one line whip or on a local issue are one thing but this is as fundamental as it gets.
Any Conservative voting against their own Government on such a motion (as well as any Opposition MP voting for it) doesn't just risk expulsion but positively invites it. Ivan Lewis has no such fears as he was left the Labour Party and is probably well aware he now faces a Labour candidate if he chooses to stand in Bury again as an Independent.
Is there a single Conservative prepared to risk everything by either abstaining (also significant given the current Parliamentary arithmetic) or actively opposing the Government in a Confidence vote? So far, the ERG and the pro-REMAIN group have huffed and puffed but neither has dared to leave the tent.
To leave the party means a loss of livelihood, status and friendships - it's a big deal. It's not the same if you are a local Councillor - you might get back as an Independent particularly in the current mood but for an MP, it's a whole different thing.
I can't see the Conservatives abdicating the field to Corbyn even for a minute - if the WA falls on January the whenever, I suspect May will shrug and try again but if it goes down twice, she will either resign (which she should) or say that as the will of the Commons has been to reject the WA, the Government will move toward a managed No Deal and that will be the point when we will see if the Cabinet will move against her or acquiesce.
Well of course, if you want Singapore-on-Thames or Caracas-on-Thames, then LEAVE seems the only way to get it because without EU involvement you can indulge in any form of crazy economic and social planning of which you can conceive.
It also offers the possibility of implementing something better and fairer.
Only slightly off-topic, but I watched the PBS programme on the 1962 Cuban missile crisis last night and thought it both excellent and chilling about how near we came to nuclear war.
On October 27th an American surveillance pilot was shot down and killed over Cuba, a Soviet nuclear submarine armed its torpedoes, and …. Fidel Castro, the hero of the left, contacted Kruschev, saying Cuba was prepared to die for Socialism and the USSR should immediately launch its nuclear weapons at the American mainland.
The American military unanimously advised Kennedy to nuke Cuba.
Fortunately, Kruschev concluded that Fidel was unhinged, and Kennedy stood firm. Both were right. Kennedy made Trump look like an amateur when it came to women, but he had judgment, and Fidel was as crazy as a shithouse rat.
We have Donald and Vlad. But the greatest risk to mankind is global warming, according to Attenborough.
Well, I think Attenborough was thinking of the major medium to long term risk, rather than a what a couple of mad politicians will do with nukes in the next two years.
Thanks as always for the article, David and as always I disagree with large parts of it.
Where are the Conservatives who will refuse to support their Government in a Vote of Confidence in the Commons? Voting against the Government on a free vote, a one line whip or on a local issue are one thing but this is as fundamental as it gets.
Any Conservative voting against their own Government on such a motion (as well as any Opposition MP voting for it) doesn't just risk expulsion but positively invites it. Ivan Lewis has no such fears as he was left the Labour Party and is probably well aware he now faces a Labour candidate if he chooses to stand in Bury again as an Independent.
Is there a single Conservative prepared to risk everything by either abstaining (also significant given the current Parliamentary arithmetic) or actively opposing the Government in a Confidence vote? So far, the ERG and the pro-REMAIN group have huffed and puffed but neither has dared to leave the tent.
To leave the party means a loss of livelihood, status and friendships - it's a big deal. It's not the same if you are a local Councillor - you might get back as an Independent particularly in the current mood but for an MP, it's a whole different thing.
I can't see the Conservatives abdicating the field to Corbyn even for a minute - if the WA falls on January the whenever, I suspect May will shrug and try again but if it goes down twice, she will either resign (which she should) or say that as the will of the Commons has been to reject the WA, the Government will move toward a managed No Deal and that will be the point when we will see if the Cabinet will move against her or acquiesce.
That's when it will get REALLY interesting.
Unless it is done as I describe below - a cross-party initiative for a short one-job government. If it involves 100+ MPs from each of the main parties, the deselection route breaks down - Tory and Labour will think twice before expelling such a high proportion of its parliamentary party (although some Labour local parties might be less reluctant).
If he has made it up he has done a pretty good job. I know of a couple of similar cases, though neither at the actually closing down stage. And most small businesses can find some way out of what looks like a hopeless situation.
Yes, the scenario in the header merits an inclusion on the (long) list of things that are unlikely but not impossible.
I must say that I find the sequence of decision making on this to be illogical. There is a deal available under which we can leave the EU without the sky falling in. It's about as popular as a drone at an airport, sure, but it's the best and only deal on offer and it is there and waiting.
So for me the correct course of action for parliament is to FIRST explore whether there is an alternative that (i) has majority MP support and (ii) can be done in practice.
If yes, fabulous, press on and do it. Do whatever it takes, force May to comply or remove her, replace her with Corbyn, replace her from within the cabinet, replace her with a cross-party unity figure, then execute the agreed alternative, leave with no deal or get article 50 extended or revoked, have that referendum, have that general election, whatever. And do it quickly. If there is an alternative, find it and ACT.
May's deal fulfils the mandate given in the referendum which was very specifically and exclusively "to leave the European Union". Thats leave covered off. So when MPs are unable to proceed forwards having voted the deal down then a referendum is all thats left.
Can't have a General Election because both parties are led by a leader the MPs don't trust and don't want them leading into a General Election, with the prospect of manifesto commitments that most of them profoundly disagree.
So an affirming vote. We had a referendum on a concept - to leave the EU. We also now know that the referendum was corrupted by illegal money and would have been declared void had it been a parliamentary election. So a 2nd vote this time on a specific proposal seems reasonable and an AFFIRMATION of democracy when money corrupted the last campaign.
Mays Deal. Or Remain. With an A50 extension until the vote can be carried out and a commitment to the EU that we will enact the result the day after.
If we take it as a given that the EU would agree to such a thing, it would nonetheless require a Parliamentary majority and a friendly Prime Minister (in order to extend A50, pass a referendum bill and amend all the Brexit legislation) to pass.
Corbyn and May both want the result of the first referendum to stand, and the sitting Prime Minister in particular has been very consistent in stating that there should not be a second vote. So if Parliament wants to hold a second referendum then it has about eleven weeks left after it returns in the New Year to execute some kind of political realignment, vote in the required compromise PM, draft all the new legislation and secure agreement to an A50 extension from 27 EU Governments. Doable, but not easy.
We don't need a new PM - May will call the referendum. Its her deal or the highway she says. Her deal delivers the referendum mandate she says. Is the Will of the People she says. And that Will of the People is being frustrated by MPs. So the only solution left is to have the people impose their will on MPs - a referendum on her specific deal.
Who cares whether she said no referendum. She said no election. She's a proven liar.
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Hard to read, isn't she? But one more consideration is that she's also petty and vindictive. Don't you think she'd enjoy screwing all the brexiteer bastards who kept trying to bring her down?
On the drones my guess is that Gatwick used that Israeli drone tracking radar thingy to follow it back to whoever was controlling it. Good job, if a little slow.
What's the likely sentence?. I think 5 yrs would not go amiss, given what they have done and how many people it has affected. An exemplary sentence, just like after the riots.
Well, a fair sentence would surely be to inflict the same detention on them that they inflicted on others. About one-and-a-half days. Times 140,000 people, equals 210,000 days between the two of them, or 105,000 days each. All right, that's 287 years each, but that's the same, in person-days, that they caused to others.
To be kind, we won't make them sleep on the floor.
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Hard to read, isn't she? But one more consideration is that she's also petty and vindictive. Don't you think she'd enjoy screwing all the brexiteer bastards who kept trying to bring her down?
At the cost of her own destruction, like Samson bringing the temple down upon the Philistines? I don't buy it.
On the drones my guess is that Gatwick used that Israeli drone tracking radar thingy to follow it back to whoever was controlling it. Good job, if a little slow.
What's the likely sentence?. I think 5 yrs would not go amiss, given what they have done and how many people it has affected. An exemplary sentence, just like after the riots.
Well, a fair sentence would surely be to inflict the same detention on them that they inflicted on others. About one-and-a-half days. Times 140,000 people, equals 210,000 days between the two of them, or 105,000 days each. All right, that's 287 years each, but that's the same, in person-days, that they caused to others.
To be kind, we won't make them sleep on the floor.
I'm afraid I am not convinced that the two people arrested represent the end of the matter. This was a sophisticated attack, with no motivation yet given. It is of course possible for two people, acting alone, to organise something like this - but I wouldn't say it was likely. It is possible they were mere facilitators who live close to the airport.
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Hard to read, isn't she? But one more consideration is that she's also petty and vindictive. Don't you think she'd enjoy screwing all the brexiteer bastards who kept trying to bring her down?
At the cost of her own destruction, like Samson bringing the temple down upon the Philistines? I don't buy it.
I'm rereading "Fall Out" and I am struck by how fragile May can be: poor sleep, crying, sometimes in a fugue, reliance on repetition. Her adherence to duty means that she won't resign, but she can be erratic and this reflects in occasional bold action, such as calling an election or signing the Dec 2017 agreement despite DUP objection. She is perfectly capable of a Samsonic act under great pressure.
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Hard to read, isn't she? But one more consideration is that she's also petty and vindictive. Don't you think she'd enjoy screwing all the brexiteer bastards who kept trying to bring her down?
At the cost of her own destruction, like Samson bringing the temple down upon the Philistines? I don't buy it.
I'm rereading "Fall Out" and I am struck by how fragile May can be: poor sleep, crying, sometimes in a fugue, reliance on repetition. Her adherence to duty means that she won't resign, but she can be erratic and this reflects in occasional bold action, such as calling an election or signing the Dec 2017 agreement despite DUP objection. She is perfectly capable of a Samsonic act under great pressure.
Agreed. Also worth noting that she knows her career is in its final chapter; I suspect what she'll be most concerned about is her legacy... She will not want to be remembered as the PM who led the country to No Deal chaos.
(Note: Even if you feel No Deal will not bring chaos, it's how she perceives it that counts at the moment.)
Thanks as always for the article, David and as always I disagree with large parts of it.
Where are the Conservatives who will refuse to support their Government in a Vote of Confidence in the Commons? Voting against the Government on a free vote, a one line whip or on a local issue are one thing but this is as fundamental as it gets.
Any Conservative voting against their own Government on such a motion (as well as any Opposition MP voting for it) doesn't just risk expulsion but positively invites it. Ivan Lewis has no such fears as he was left the Labour Party and is probably well aware he now faces a Labour candidate if he chooses to stand in Bury again as an Independent.
Is there a single Conservative prepared to risk everything by either abstaining (also significant given the current Parliamentary arithmetic) or actively opposing the Government in a Confidence vote? So far, the ERG and the pro-REMAIN group have huffed and puffed but neither has dared to leave the tent.
To leave the party means a loss of livelihood, status and friendships - it's a big deal. It's not the same if you are a local Councillor - you might get back as an Independent particularly in the current mood but for an MP, it's a whole different thing.
I can't see the Conservatives abdicating the field to Corbyn even for a minute - if the WA falls on January the whenever, I suspect May will shrug and try again but if it goes down twice, she will either resign (which she should) or say that as the will of the Commons has been to reject the WA, the Government will move toward a managed No Deal and that will be the point when we will see if the Cabinet will move against her or acquiesce.
That's when it will get REALLY interesting.
Unless it is done as I describe below - a cross-party initiative for a short one-job government. If it involves 100+ MPs from each of the main parties, the deselection route breaks down - Tory and Labour will think twice before expelling such a high proportion of its parliamentary party (although some Labour local parties might be less reluctant).
Also, wouldn't Corbyn be PM during the election campaign in this scenario? It would be mad to give him the advantages of incumbency during such a period.
On the drones my guess is that Gatwick used that Israeli drone tracking radar thingy to follow it back to whoever was controlling it. Good job, if a little slow.
What's the likely sentence?. I think 5 yrs would not go amiss, given what they have done and how many people it has affected. An exemplary sentence, just like after the riots.
Well, a fair sentence would surely be to inflict the same detention on them that they inflicted on others. About one-and-a-half days. Times 140,000 people, equals 210,000 days between the two of them, or 105,000 days each. All right, that's 287 years each, but that's the same, in person-days, that they caused to others.
To be kind, we won't make them sleep on the floor.
I'm afraid I am not convinced that the two people arrested represent the end of the matter. This was a sophisticated attack, with no motivation yet given. It is of course possible for two people, acting alone, to organise something like this - but I wouldn't say it was likely. It is possible they were mere facilitators who live close to the airport.
We just don't know do we? Environmentalists? Local Gatwock objectors? Russians? Bat-shit crazy loners? Could be any of those I suspect. Unlikely to be 'conventional' terrorists I'd have thought since no claims being made and no physical damage caused.
Thanks as always for the article, David and as always I disagree with large parts of it.
Where are the Conservatives who will refuse to support their Government in a Vote of Confidence in the Commons? Voting against the Government on a free vote, a one line whip or on a local issue are one thing but this is as fundamental as it gets.
Any Conservative voting against their own Government on such a motion (as well as any Opposition MP voting for it) doesn't just risk expulsion but positively invites it. Ivan Lewis has no such fears as he was left the Labour Party and is probably well aware he now faces a Labour candidate if he chooses to stand in Bury again as an Independent.
Is there a single Conservative prepared to risk everything by either abstaining (also significant given the current Parliamentary arithmetic) or actively opposing the Government in a Confidence vote? So far, the ERG and the pro-REMAIN group have huffed and puffed but neither has dared to leave the tent.
To leave the party means a loss of livelihood, status and friendships - it's a big deal. It's not the same if you are a local Councillor - you might get back as an Independent particularly in the current mood but for an MP, it's a whole different thing.
I can't see the Conservatives abdicating the field to Corbyn even for a minute - if the WA falls on January the whenever, I suspect May will shrug and try again but if it goes down twice, she will either resign (which she should) or say that as the will of the Commons has been to reject the WA, the Government will move toward a managed No Deal and that will be the point when we will see if the Cabinet will move against her or acquiesce.
That's when it will get REALLY interesting.
Unless it is done as I describe below - a cross-party initiative for a short one-job government. If it involves 100+ MPs from each of the main parties, the deselection route breaks down - Tory and Labour will think twice before expelling such a high proportion of its parliamentary party (although some Labour local parties might be less reluctant).
Also, wouldn't Corbyn be PM during the election campaign in this scenario? It would be mad to give him the advantages of incumbency during such a period.
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
No it isn't because both parties won't line up behind clear options- Corbyn is promising a unicorn renegotiation and the Tories can't agree to even do that - and there is no guarantee the public will return a parliament any better to agree something, not least since masses of Mps are already perfectly legally seeking to remain despite their manifestos.
A GE is the worst option of all for resolving the impasse. It also needs an extension which the EU would have no reason to grant.
It will be interesting to see who the arrested couple represent. I'll always assume it's a nest of Greens - they have motive, opportunity and they were relatively easily caught. In that case, we'll see the usual self-indulgent and arrogant rants when they come to trial. "We're saving the world," and all that.
Given it was well organised and deliberate, it can hardly be a hobbyist playing around, and I'm not sure what Putin would gain from pissing off the general public, whereas that's the M.O of the Greens.
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Hard to read, isn't she? But one more consideration is that she's also petty and vindictive. Don't you think she'd enjoy screwing all the brexiteer bastards who kept trying to bring her down?
At the cost of her own destruction, like Samson bringing the temple down upon the Philistines? I don't buy it.
I'm rereading "Fall Out" and I am struck by how fragile May can be: poor sleep, crying, sometimes in a fugue, reliance on repetition. Her adherence to duty means that she won't resign, but she can be erratic and this reflects in occasional bold action, such as calling an election or signing the Dec 2017 agreement despite DUP objection. She is perfectly capable of a Samsonic act under great pressure.
Agreed. Also worth noting that she knows her career is in its final chapter; I suspect what she'll be most concerned about is her legacy... She will not want to be remembered as the PM who led the country to No Deal chaos.
(Note: Even if you feel No Deal will not bring chaos, it's how she perceives it that counts at the moment.)
Ah, but will she want to be remembered as the first Conservative Prime Minister since Peel to rupture the party? Not to mention letting Corbyn have a free hand to wreak havoc for five years? There are risks to any course of action, but the route with the least risk of blowing up her own side, and arguably the best chance of both getting her Deal through and inflicting damage on Labour, is to simply run the clock down, play chicken with the PLP and wait for them to blink.
I do wonder if extension is unlikely now and it'll be either revocation (followed by referendum, presumably) or nothing.
I'm still of the opinion that the likely options (in descending order) are:
1. No Deal 2. Realignment, Revocation, General Election 3. Labour moderates blink: Deal, General Election
Followed by the unlikely options:
4. Government falls in January, March General Election, then who knows? 5. Realignment, A50 extension granted, Referendum, implement result, General Election
I would reverse the order of 1 to 3, except a Deal passing will not be followed by a GE until 2022.
Which neither Corbyn nor May will contest.
Magic Grandpa's remaining sparkle was wiped off in the Guardian today.....
McDonnell said as much on Thursday. However, he went on to say that he agreed with the Varoufakis approach of sending as many socialists as possible to Brussels to achieve reform from within.
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
No it isn't because both parties won't line up behind clear options- Corbyn is promising a unicorn renegotiation and the Tories can't agree to even do that - and there is no guarantee the public will return a parliament any better to agree something, not least since masses of Mps are already perfectly legally seeking to remain despite their manifestos.
A GE is the worst option of all for resolving the impasse. It also needs an extension which the EU would have no reason to grant.
If there were a GE, 90% of voters would be backing parties that support Brexit.
But I can see May as you suggest somehow ploughing on regardless. I think we will get the deal one way or another.
Is HMQ inviting Jezza one constitutional step too far?
I'm starting to think May's deal is the least worst option. A brief exit into the penalty box, realisation that unicorn cake was a delusion after all, then back in properly
Welcome aboard.
Of course it is the least worst option.
Better one sinner...
Rubbish , why go through all that crap to help the Tory clowns. Just get on with revoking A50 and get these morons out of office, a cardboard cutout could do a better job.
Morning Malcolm, hope the turnips are OK up there.
And I trust the root vegetables are in rude health as well
Morning Ydoethur, Most of them seem to be in Westminster and surrounding areas, though some of the really rotten ones have been left up here.
The problem of the Scottish Parliament in a nut shell.
Morning Malc.
Morning David, Agree , hard to believe but Holyrood has even bigger duffers than Westminster. It is hideous to watch them at times, you wonder how they managed to fill in the forms to stand for election
Very good interview with George Osborne on radio 4. He says Mrs May's huge mistake was to say "Brexit means Brexit" dismissing and alienating 16 million voters. He thinks the most likely solution is a General Election. The most effective and underrated method for sorting out an impasse
No it isn't because both parties won't line up behind clear options- Corbyn is promising a unicorn renegotiation and the Tories can't agree to even do that - and there is no guarantee the public will return a parliament any better to agree something, not least since masses of Mps are already perfectly legally seeking to remain despite their manifestos.
A GE is the worst option of all for resolving the impasse. It also needs an extension which the EU would have no reason to grant.
If there were a GE, 90% of voters would be backing parties that support Brexit.
They were before and yet most of its voters seem to think labour is for remain and get angry at the party carrying out it's policy!
McDonnell said as much on Thursday. However, he went on to say that he agreed with the Varoufakis approach of sending as many socialists as possible to Brussels to achieve reform from within.
Madness. The abandonment of state aid has made the whole European continent wealthier and leaner.
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Hard to read, isn't she? But one more consideration is that she's also petty and vindictive. Don't you think she'd enjoy screwing all the brexiteer bastards who kept trying to bring her down?
At the cost of her own destruction, like Samson bringing the temple down upon the Philistines? I don't buy it.
I don't think it assures her destruction. I mean, she's currently on a timer set to self-destruct after brexit, but a referendum would upset the board. If her deal wins, she's strengthened and vindicated. If remain wins... well, it's complicated. A part of her base is bitter and hopping mad and can't wait to relitigate the issue somehow, but the people have spoken and most of the voters are sick of arguing about it. Potentially she can hold on indefinitely the way she's holding on now: The base look like they might choose a head-banger, and the only way MPs can avoid letting them do that is by sticking with her...
Except calling the early election - an out-of-character act of boldness that backfired spectacularly - was an attempt to take advantage of Labour's apparent weakness to win a huge Parliamentary majority. Whereas trying to call a referendum on the Deal would carry a very high of bringing down her own Government - whether through alienating the DUP, splitting the Tory Party itself, or both.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Hard to read, isn't she? But one more consideration is that she's also petty and vindictive. Don't you think she'd enjoy screwing all the brexiteer bastards who kept trying to bring her down?
At the cost of her own destruction, like Samson bringing the temple down upon the Philistines? I don't buy it.
I'm rereading "Fall Out" and I am struck by how fragile May can be: poor sleep, crying, sometimes in a fugue, reliance on repetition. Her adherence to duty means that she won't resign, but she can be erratic and this reflects in occasional bold action, such as calling an election or signing the Dec 2017 agreement despite DUP objection. She is perfectly capable of a Samsonic act under great pressure.
Agreed. Also worth noting that she knows her career is in its final chapter; I suspect what she'll be most concerned about is her legacy... She will not want to be remembered as the PM who led the country to No Deal chaos.
(Note: Even if you feel No Deal will not bring chaos, it's how she perceives it that counts at the moment.)
Ah, but will she want to be remembered as the first Conservative Prime Minister since Peel to rupture the party? Not to mention letting Corbyn have a free hand to wreak havoc for five years? There are risks to any course of action, but the route with the least risk of blowing up her own side, and arguably the best chance of both getting her Deal through and inflicting damage on Labour, is to simply run the clock down, play chicken with the PLP and wait for them to blink.
Interesting though that Peel is ranked 6th (out of 52) in The Times list of greatest Prime Ministers (behind Churchill, Lloyd George, Galdstone, Pitt the Younger, and Thatcher).
Funny but in fairness not strictly true. As many a consultation admits afterwards, listen does not mean you'll do what the speakers want.
Precisely - as we learned from that consultation of 33.6 million people a couple of years ago. There's no shortage of MPs willing to turn a deaf ear to that one.
McDonnell said as much on Thursday. However, he went on to say that he agreed with the Varoufakis approach of sending as many socialists as possible to Brussels to achieve reform from within.
That's very different from leaving and then pissing into the tent from outside.
I'm guessing but 400,000 of the 500,000 members probably agree with Varoufakis, 50,000 want to leave and 50,000 are fairly happy with the existing terms.
McDonnell said as much on Thursday. However, he went on to say that he agreed with the Varoufakis approach of sending as many socialists as possible to Brussels to achieve reform from within.
Madness. The abandonment of state aid has made the whole European continent wealthier and leaner.
I'm sure the former steelworkers of Redcar will agree.
Funny but in fairness not strictly true. As many a consultation admits afterwards, listen does not mean you'll do what the speakers want.
Precisely - as we learned from that consultation of 33.6 million people a couple of years ago. There's no shortage of MPs willing to turn a deaf ear to that one.
Name me one MP that isn't listening to a large proportion of the 33.6m? Or one that is listening to them all?
McDonnell said as much on Thursday. However, he went on to say that he agreed with the Varoufakis approach of sending as many socialists as possible to Brussels to achieve reform from within.
Madness. The abandonment of state aid has made the whole European continent wealthier and leaner.
I'm sure the former steelworkers of Redcar will agree.
McDonnell said as much on Thursday. However, he went on to say that he agreed with the Varoufakis approach of sending as many socialists as possible to Brussels to achieve reform from within.
That's interesting. I think it is McDonnell who ultimately calls the shots.
As far as I can see the only difference between Corbyn's planned Deal and May's Deal is Corbyn wants the UK in a permanent Customs Union rather than a temporary Customs Union with a few more workers' rights added on, so if he did extend Article 50 that would be what he was aiming for
May's deal fulfils the mandate given in the referendum which was very specifically and exclusively "to leave the European Union". Thats leave covered off. So when MPs are unable to proceed forwards having voted the deal down then a referendum is all thats left.
Can't have a General Election because both parties are led by a leader the MPs don't trust and don't want them leading into a General Election, with the prospect of manifesto commitments that most of them profoundly disagree.
So an affirming vote. We had a referendum on a concept - to leave the EU. We also now know that the referendum was corrupted by illegal money and would have been declared void had it been a parliamentary election. So a 2nd vote this time on a specific proposal seems reasonable and an AFFIRMATION of democracy when money corrupted the last campaign.
Mays Deal. Or Remain. With an A50 extension until the vote can be carried out and a commitment to the EU that we will enact the result the day after.
So people who want to leave the EU have to win two referendums but people who want to remain in it have to win only one?
As far as I can see the only difference between Corbyn's planned Deal and May's Deal is Corbyn wants the UK in a permanent Customs Union rather than a temporary Customs Union with a few more workers' rights added on, so if he did extend Article 50 that would be what he was aiming for
He also wants to leave the Single Market and yet retain all the same benefits of being in the Single Market. Impossible!
Plus workers' rights are something that the UK Parliament can look at whenever it so chooses - it doesn't need to be incorporated into the WA or anything else.
Comments
(Is that better?
Or would be, if the Welsh Assembly wasn't worse again.
Instances of MPs crossing the floor are unusual, and previous instances of formal splits are salutary. As we know, Labour was crippled and lost three successive elections after the Gang of Four broke away; before that, the Liberal Party was virtually destroyed by schism.
No Deal simply seems the most likely outcome to me because there is no majority in this Parliament for any course of action, save possibly for Revocation - and that would either require MPs on both sides to break communion with their colleagues, or for one side to collapse and throw most of its members' careers on the funeral pyre in the process.
But Hell, we're all just guessing at this juncture: I like to say that I'm reasonably sure that the DUP will never back the Deal, and that the SNP ought to do well whenever the next GE happens, but apart from that nothing is easily predictable. I might well turn out to be completely wrong in my assumptions.
Can't have a General Election because both parties are led by a leader the MPs don't trust and don't want them leading into a General Election, with the prospect of manifesto commitments that most of them profoundly disagree.
So an affirming vote. We had a referendum on a concept - to leave the EU. We also now know that the referendum was corrupted by illegal money and would have been declared void had it been a parliamentary election. So a 2nd vote this time on a specific proposal seems reasonable and an AFFIRMATION of democracy when money corrupted the last campaign.
Mays Deal. Or Remain. With an A50 extension until the vote can be carried out and a commitment to the EU that we will enact the result the day after.
Some weaker souls apparently flaked at my earlier puns.
Boswell: Life of Johnson
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11541708/The-court-case-that-proves-you-cant-sue-politicians-for-breaking-their-election-promises.html
Corbyn and May both want the result of the first referendum to stand, and the sitting Prime Minister in particular has been very consistent in stating that there should not be a second vote. So if Parliament wants to hold a second referendum then it has about eleven weeks left after it returns in the New Year to execute some kind of political realignment, vote in the required compromise PM, draft all the new legislation and secure agreement to an A50 extension from 27 EU Governments. Doable, but not easy.
...tho given they're facing 5 years inside for each offence and unlimited fines.....I suspect the current laws are quite robust enough....
Who cares whether she said no referendum. She said no election. She's a proven liar.
Have a good morning.
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1076406894875545601
Those betting on next PM should take note.
In more pressing matters, I've just used the last of the milk.
On October 27th an American surveillance pilot was shot down and killed over Cuba, a Soviet nuclear submarine armed its torpedoes, and …. Fidel Castro, the hero of the left, contacted Kruschev, saying Cuba was prepared to die for Socialism and the USSR should immediately launch its nuclear weapons at the American mainland.
The American military unanimously advised Kennedy to nuke Cuba.
Fortunately, Kruschev concluded that Fidel was unhinged, and Kennedy stood firm. Both were right. Kennedy made Trump look like an amateur when it came to women, but he had judgment, and Fidel was as crazy as a shithouse rat.
We have Donald and Vlad. But the greatest risk to mankind is global warming, according to Attenborough.
Thanks as always for the article, David and as always I disagree with large parts of it.
Where are the Conservatives who will refuse to support their Government in a Vote of Confidence in the Commons? Voting against the Government on a free vote, a one line whip or on a local issue are one thing but this is as fundamental as it gets.
Any Conservative voting against their own Government on such a motion (as well as any Opposition MP voting for it) doesn't just risk expulsion but positively invites it. Ivan Lewis has no such fears as he was left the Labour Party and is probably well aware he now faces a Labour candidate if he chooses to stand in Bury again as an Independent.
Is there a single Conservative prepared to risk everything by either abstaining (also significant given the current Parliamentary arithmetic) or actively opposing the Government in a Confidence vote? So far, the ERG and the pro-REMAIN group have huffed and puffed but neither has dared to leave the tent.
To leave the party means a loss of livelihood, status and friendships - it's a big deal. It's not the same if you are a local Councillor - you might get back as an Independent particularly in the current mood but for an MP, it's a whole different thing.
I can't see the Conservatives abdicating the field to Corbyn even for a minute - if the WA falls on January the whenever, I suspect May will shrug and try again but if it goes down twice, she will either resign (which she should) or say that as the will of the Commons has been to reject the WA, the Government will move toward a managed No Deal and that will be the point when we will see if the Cabinet will move against her or acquiesce.
That's when it will get REALLY interesting.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/21/michael-gove-recruit-military-planner-amid-food-shortage-fears/
Osborne is right. The Tories are looking at a very long time in opposition if this comes to pass.
It will be thoroughly deserved and this generation of Tory leaders will be slaughtered in the history books.
It also offers the possibility of implementing something better and fairer.
https://twitter.com/batanball/status/1076230038251622400?s=21
I must say that I find the sequence of decision making on this to be illogical. There is a deal available under which we can leave the EU without the sky falling in. It's about as popular as a drone at an airport, sure, but it's the best and only deal on offer and it is there and waiting.
So for me the correct course of action for parliament is to FIRST explore whether there is an alternative that (i) has majority MP support and (ii) can be done in practice.
If yes, fabulous, press on and do it. Do whatever it takes, force May to comply or remove her, replace her with Corbyn, replace her from within the cabinet, replace her with a cross-party unity figure, then execute the agreed alternative, leave with no deal or get article 50 extended or revoked, have that referendum, have that general election, whatever. And do it quickly. If there is an alternative, find it and ACT.
And if there isn't, STFU and pass the deal.
May has a track record for stubbornness as well as duplicity. She might execute a 180-degree about-turn on a second referendum, but I'll believe it when I see it.
(Flake? 99? Geddit? Jeez, tough crowd... 😀 )
About one-and-a-half days. Times 140,000 people, equals 210,000 days between the two of them, or 105,000 days each.
All right, that's 287 years each, but that's the same, in person-days, that they caused to others.
To be kind, we won't make them sleep on the floor.
(Note: Even if you feel No Deal will not bring chaos, it's how she perceives it that counts at the moment.)
A GE is the worst option of all for resolving the impasse. It also needs an extension which the EU would have no reason to grant.
It will be interesting to see who the arrested couple represent. I'll always assume it's a nest of Greens - they have motive, opportunity and they were relatively easily caught. In that case, we'll see the usual self-indulgent and arrogant rants when they come to trial. "We're saving the world," and all that.
Given it was well organised and deliberate, it can hardly be a hobbyist playing around, and I'm not sure what Putin would gain from pissing off the general public, whereas that's the M.O of the Greens.
Although some do Zoom over my head.
Meanwhile, we still await TSE's AV Magnum opus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Prime_Ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom#Other_polls
I'm guessing but 400,000 of the 500,000 members probably agree with Varoufakis, 50,000 want to leave and 50,000 are fairly happy with the existing terms.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6521939/Corbyns-ally-row-stupid-woman-jibe-chosen-successor-Labour-leader.html
Plus workers' rights are something that the UK Parliament can look at whenever it so chooses - it doesn't need to be incorporated into the WA or anything else.