Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After Thursday’s Alastair Meeks 2019 predictions David Herdson

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited December 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After Thursday’s Alastair Meeks 2019 predictions David Herdson takes a very different view of what the New Year will bring

2018 was boring, wasn’t it? No leadership change among the three main parties for the first time in four years, only the third year this decade without a general election or a major referendum, and not even the distraction of a big foreign election (the best on offer was the Italian election, which also produced the only change among the G7 leaders).

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    In
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    Som
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    Nia
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    Sucks
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    So David's predictions are basically "nothing has changed"? Was it written by David or Mrs May?

    Once again we have the idea that it is ALL about Westminster
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    Good grief. Am I in one of Vanilla's alternate realities threads?

    Time for a cuppa
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,745
    I think there should be a referendum on whether to adopt Alastair Meeks' package of predictions, or David Herdson's. I want Brexit to happen a.s.a.p, so I vote for David.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    Good morning Bev (and everyone else).
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936

    Good morning Bev (and everyone else).

    Good morning
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    JohnLoony said:

    I think there should be a referendum on whether to adopt Alastair Meeks' package of predictions, or David Herdson's. I want Brexit to happen a.s.a.p, so I vote for David.

    I vote for Alistair's because they are predictions. I feel that every David wrote could apply today or yesterday or last week...
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 13,238
    Good morning, everyone. I'm glad to see the cave rescuers honoured, and the other gongs given to emergency services personnel. Quite cheered me up!
    On topic, I fear Brexit is going to happen, although it will be on May's Deal, very much for the reasons Mr H gives. By the summer though problems will be developing, particularly around holiday travel and they will be loudly construed in part of the Press as Europes Revenge, which will sour the situation even more.
    I'm sure Cable will go, probably shortly after Brexit; it hasn't helped the LD's being behind the SNP in Parliamentary seats, but neither Cable nor the back office has covered itself with glory and a new leader...... not sure it will be Swinson, ....... will have to follow Jo Grimonds advice and 'march toward the sound of gunfire'! The LD's will continue to do well in local government elections though and just might do very well in May.
    Both the other two leaders will carry on, although under threat.
    TBH, I don't think there will be a GE; the function of the Conservative party is to 'keep our side in power', and somehow that is what they'll do, although a Private Members Bill to bring Norn Ireland into line with both rUK and the RoI on abortion might just pass and send the DUP into space.

    Personally I'm hoping that I shall have an operation this year which will sort out my lumbar stenosis and in due course give me both legs again. I also hope that this time next year I shall be in a warmer climate.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936


    Personally I'm hoping that I shall have an operation this year which will sort out my lumbar stenosis and in due course give me both legs again. I also hope that this time next year I shall be in a warmer climate.

    Good morning Mr OKC - my best wishes for your operation and I hope you get your warmer climate too
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 13,238
    edited December 2018


    Personally I'm hoping that I shall have an operation this year which will sort out my lumbar stenosis and in due course give me both legs again. I also hope that this time next year I shall be in a warmer climate.

    Good morning Mr OKC - my best wishes for your operation and I hope you get your warmer climate too
    Thank you Ms C; I'm told the operation should be in late Jan so I should be fully mobile again by Easter and able to fly anywhere, assuming planes are landing etc, by the end of May.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785
    edited December 2018
    On Point #3, I'm not saying a referendum is the most likely outcome, but I don't think this gets the argument right.

    First, it doesn't matter for these purposes whether it *should* happen. Politically-minded people are very flexible about process (in a "we were always at war with Eastasia" kind of way), and very good at justifying the justice and legitimacy of a process that leads to the outcome they want, so if there was no good argument for or against a referendum, someone would come up with one as necessary. I personally think there are good arguments for one (go figure) but it doesn't matter whether I'm right.

    The argument why a referendum may happen is to do with the parliamentary veto points. There are lots of MPs, especially on the opposition side, who want a new referendum. It's likely that at least some of their votes will be needed for TMay's deal to pass. It looks like it will be difficult to get a Commons majority for TMay's deal. I know the argument is that if TMay holds firm the Remainist MPs will blink, but it's not really clear that they will; Neither Leave nor Remain voters will thank them for it, and the negative political consequences of No Deal mainly apply to the government, not the opposition. But it looks likely that they would vote for the deal in return for the referendum. So there's your parliamentary majority. It doesn't sound like there are MPs wanting No Deal on the ballot paper, so that deals with that problem, and I don't think it's true that it's hard to legislate for one while the ratification process is ongoing; You pass all the legislation you would have otherwise, but state that it's subject to a binding referendum. The main difference is that you have more time (because you can get an extension) and you have enough votes, both of which make the ratification legislation easier to pass, not harder.

    The argument against is simply that the PM may not want to do it. Her base would hate her if she did, and I think David Herdson's point #4 is correct, so there's pretty much no way around her. OTOH her career is about to end *unless* she does something like this to upset the board, so it wouldn't be at all weird for her to agree to it; She may even be hoping for it in a "don't throw me in the briar patch" way: Either her referendum wins, in which case she's triumphant and vindicated, or remain wins, which is the result she prefers.

    Unfortunately betting on this ends up being a bet on Theresa May's mental state, which is hard to read as she doesn't tweet much or write poetry or anything.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 11,136

    On Point #3, I'm not saying a referendum is the most likely outcome, but I don't think this gets the argument right.

    First, it doesn't matter for these purposes whether it *should* happen. Politically-minded people are very flexible about process (in a "we were always at war with Eastasia" kind of way), and very good at justifying the justice and legitimacy of a process that leads to the outcome they want, so if there was no good argument for or against a referendum, someone would come up with one as necessary. I personally think there are good arguments for one (go figure) but it doesn't matter whether I'm right.

    The argument why a referendum may happen is to do with the parliamentary veto points. There are lots of MPs, especially on the opposition side, who want a new referendum. It's likely that at least some of their votes will be needed for TMay's deal to pass. It looks like it will be difficult to get a Commons majority for TMay's deal. I know the argument is that if TMay holds firm the Remainist MPs will blink, but it's not really clear that they will; Neither Leave nor Remain voters will thank them for it, and the negative political consequences of No Deal mainly apply to the government, not the opposition. But it looks likely that they would vote for the deal in return for the referendum. So there's your parliamentary majority. It doesn't sound like there are MPs wanting No Deal on the ballot paper, so that deals with that problem, and I don't think it's true that it's hard to legislate for one while the ratification process is ongoing; You pass all the legislation you would have otherwise, but state that it's subject to a binding referendum. The main difference is that you have more time (because you can get an extension) and you have enough votes, both of which make the ratification legislation easier to pass, not harder.

    The argument against is simply that the PM may not want to do it. Her base would hate her if she did, and I think David Herdson's point #4 is correct, so there's pretty much no way around her. OTOH her career is about to end *unless* she does something like this to upset the board, so it wouldn't be at all weird for her to agree to it; She may even be hoping for it in a "don't throw me in the briar patch" way: Either her referendum wins, in which case she's triumphant and vindicated, or remain wins, which is the result she prefers.

    Unfortunately betting on this ends up being a bet on Theresa May's mental state, which is hard to read as she doesn't tweet much or write poetry or anything.

    I wonder when this canard about May’s preferred outcome being Remain will disappear? Her whole administration has been dedicated to leaving. It’s simply wishful thinking to consider thAt she wants to Remain.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 40,764
    Mortimer said:

    I wonder when this canard about May’s preferred outcome being Remain will disappear? Her whole administration has been dedicated to leaving. It’s simply wishful thinking to consider thAt she wants to Remain.

    The answer to that question lies in another question; "What keeps her PM?"

    Saying "Brexit means Brexit" was enough to begin with. Then the citizens of nowhere speech. If it appears that remain would keep her in the job a pivot is not unlikely...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,809
    Scott_P said:

    Mortimer said:

    I wonder when this canard about May’s preferred outcome being Remain will disappear? Her whole administration has been dedicated to leaving. It’s simply wishful thinking to consider thAt she wants to Remain.

    The answer to that question lies in another question; "What keeps her PM?"

    Saying "Brexit means Brexit" was enough to begin with. Then the citizens of nowhere speech. If it appears that remain would keep her in the job a pivot is not unlikely...
    Good job the PCP didn't make her immune from being challenged for most of 2019...

    I suppose if David is right about that rule being flexible, then I guess it comes down to how many of the 200 who supported her did so on the basis that they think she will deliver Remain, and how many would tolerate No Deal.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 13,238
    May voted Remain, or at the very least made a speech canning for a Remain vote.
  • Mortimer said:


    I wonder when this canard about May’s preferred outcome being Remain will disappear? Her whole administration has been dedicated to leaving. It’s simply wishful thinking to consider thAt she wants to Remain.

    It's of course true that her whole administration has been dedicated to leaving. If it wasn't, she would have lost a leadership challenge. But if you listen to the interviews when she's asked something like, "would we be better off remaining", she equivocates, when the obvious answer is to say it's better to leave, since, as you say, her whole administration is dedicated to leaving.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,869
    edited December 2018
    The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46700743
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,745
    (1) Today is the 75th birthday of the American illustrator Molly Bang.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molly_Bang

    (2) The actor Macaulay Culkin has announced that he doesn't like his existing middle name (Carson), so he's going to change his middle name by deed poll (or whatever the American equivalent is) to "Macaulay Culkin", which means that his name will be Macaulay Macaulay Culkin Culkin.

    www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=12183022

    (3) The thought thus occurred to me that if Molly Bang had the same idea, she would become Molly Molly Bang Bang.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,971
    An election that may produce the same result again, and possibly just one change of party leader isn't all that dramatic. Nevertheless I'd go along with the predictions, except that I don't think no deal on 29 March at all likely. And to describe leaving the EU on the due date as a "partial Brexit" is a bit of a nonsense.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,971

    Good morning, everyone. I'm glad to see the cave rescuers honoured, and the other gongs given to emergency services personnel. Quite cheered me up!
    On topic, I fear Brexit is going to happen, although it will be on May's Deal, very much for the reasons Mr H gives. By the summer though problems will be developing, particularly around holiday travel and they will be loudly construed in part of the Press as Europes Revenge, which will sour the situation even more.
    I'm sure Cable will go, probably shortly after Brexit; it hasn't helped the LD's being behind the SNP in Parliamentary seats, but neither Cable nor the back office has covered itself with glory and a new leader...... not sure it will be Swinson, ....... will have to follow Jo Grimonds advice and 'march toward the sound of gunfire'! The LD's will continue to do well in local government elections though and just might do very well in May.
    Both the other two leaders will carry on, although under threat.
    TBH, I don't think there will be a GE; the function of the Conservative party is to 'keep our side in power', and somehow that is what they'll do, although a Private Members Bill to bring Norn Ireland into line with both rUK and the RoI on abortion might just pass and send the DUP into space.

    Personally I'm hoping that I shall have an operation this year which will sort out my lumbar stenosis and in due course give me both legs again. I also hope that this time next year I shall be in a warmer climate.

    I had that operation early last year and it went very well (although as a progressive condition some of the symptoms have returned), so I wish you the best of luck. Very important to follow the post-op instructions regarding exercise, and the things you shouldn't be doing.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936

    The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46700743

    The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.

    At least i am in better form now, having had some buttered crumpets drizzled with honey to round off breakfast ;)
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,971
    Mortimer said:

    On Point #3, I'm not saying a referendum is the most likely outcome, but I don't think this gets the argument right.

    First, it doesn't matter for these purposes whether it *should* happen. Politically-minded people are very flexible about process (in a "sn't matter whether I'm right.

    The argument why a referendum may happen is to do with the parliamentary veto points. There are lots of MPs, especially on the opposition side, who want a new referendum. It's likely that at least some of their votes will be needed for TMay's deal to pass. It looks like it will be difficult to get a Commons majority for TMay's deal. I know the argument is that if TMay holds firm the Remainist MPs will blink, but it's not really clear that they will; Neither Leave nor Remain voters will thank them for it, and the negative political consequences of No Deal mainly apply to the government, not the opposition. But it looks likely that they would vote for the deal in return for the referendum. So there's your parliamentary majority. It doesn't sound like there are MPs wanting No Deal on the ballot paper, so that deals with that problem, and I don't think it's true that it's hard to legislate for one while the ratification process is ongoing; You pass all the legislation you would have otherwise, but state that it's subject to a binding referendum. The main difference is that you have more time (because you can get an extension) and you have enough votes, both of which make the ratification legislation easier to pass, not harder.

    The argument against is simply that the PM may not want to do it. Her base would hate her if she did, and I think David Herdson's point #4 is correct, so there's pretty much no way around her. OTOH her career is about to end *unless* she does something like this to upset the board, so it wouldn't be at all weird for her to agree to it; She may even be hoping for it in a "don't throw me in the briar patch" way: Either her referendum wins, in which case she's triumphant and vindicated, or remain wins, which is the result she prefers.

    Unfortunately betting on this ends up being a bet on Theresa May's mental state, which is hard to read as she doesn't tweet much or write poetry or anything.

    I wonder when this canard about May’s preferred outcome being Remain will disappear? Her whole administration has been dedicated to leaving. It’s simply wishful thinking to consider thAt she wants to Remain.
    She wants to leave, and has been trying to deliver it, because she sees it as her duty and her promise, but I am quite sure that objectively she would say that the best thing for the country (aside from the fallout) would be the status quo; that was her original decision and there is nothing that has happened in the past two years that makes Brexit look any less idiotic.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    Mr Herdsons analysis is very conservative and would have stood up very well prior to 2015. However, with tensions raised and the politics of populism dominant, I think there is a bit more chaos in the system. The reckless brinkmanship of May is one example. So it could play out as David says, but there are many rolls of the dice here.

    If reality starts to bite and Brexit hits people in their wallets, we could see some bigger changes. Until them people will carry on arguing the toss and trading opinions.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,114

    The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46700743

    The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.

    At least i am in better form now, having had some buttered crumpets drizzled with honey to round off breakfast ;)

    Whatever replaced it would be criticised in exactly the same way.
  • On the topic of leadership I think it's certainly true that we a ready for a change of leadership in the Lib Dems - but the problem is that there's still no clear sign that any of the credible alternatives actually want the job... yet.

    When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas. :(
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,971

    The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46700743

    The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.

    At least i am in better form now, having had some buttered crumpets drizzled with honey to round off breakfast ;)

    Whatever replaced it would be criticised in exactly the same way.
    Porridge isnt so bad?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,809
    Jonathan said:

    Mr Herdsons analysis is very conservative and would have stood up very well prior to 2015. However, with tensions raised and the politics of populism dominant, I think there is a bit more chaos in the system. The reckless brinkmanship of May is one example. So it could play out as David says, but there are many rolls of the dice here.

    If reality starts to bite and Brexit hits people in their wallets, we could see some bigger changes. Until them people will carry on arguing the toss and trading opinions.

    I don't think David's analysis is in the least bit conservative. He's saying that May's deal will eventually pass, partly with the support of Labour MPs. I think that's quite a bold prediction.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267

    On the topic of leadership I think it's certainly true that we a ready for a change of leadership in the Lib Dems - but the problem is that there's still no clear sign that any of the credible alternatives actually want the job... yet.

    When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas. :(

    The leader is irrelevant. The Lib Dem’s weakness is that they have no power to offer anything on Brexit and an underlying sense that they would sell their own grandmothers if they did have the chance , so can’t really be trusted.

    They need to wind the party up and start afresh.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,267
    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mr Herdsons analysis is very conservative and would have stood up very well prior to 2015. However, with tensions raised and the politics of populism dominant, I think there is a bit more chaos in the system. The reckless brinkmanship of May is one example. So it could play out as David says, but there are many rolls of the dice here.

    If reality starts to bite and Brexit hits people in their wallets, we could see some bigger changes. Until them people will carry on arguing the toss and trading opinions.

    I don't think David's analysis is in the least bit conservative. He's saying that May's deal will eventually pass, partly with the support of Labour MPs. I think that's quite a bold prediction.
    A bold prediction of the most conservative outcome. Kicking pain down the road,
  • A good piece though I disagree with sections of it - what is absolutely clear is that nothing is clear!

    I cannot see Labour MPs - or for that matter Tory MPs opposed to it - turning round and voting for May's deal. What is clear is that a majority of MPs will block no deal and with the Grieve amendment handing control to the Commons once May's deal falls you will see that happen fairly quickly. The government will then be faced with scenarios where it choses to ignore the expressed will of the majority of MPs and once again finds itself in contempt which surely doesn't leave it functional - they may not like being told what to do by the Commons but no government can serve as such without the support of MPs.

    This also helps May. She will not get her deal through parliament. Her deal is Brexit as defined by the referendum question. Her deal is the only form of Brexit on the table. So going over the heads of MPs will be her only remaining move. Whether a general election or fresh referendum is anyone's guess, but determined as she is to deliver her deal a fresh mandate is the only way to do so
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,114
    Jonathan said:

    On the topic of leadership I think it's certainly true that we a ready for a change of leadership in the Lib Dems - but the problem is that there's still no clear sign that any of the credible alternatives actually want the job... yet.

    When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas. :(

    The leader is irrelevant. The Lib Dem’s weakness is that they have no power to offer anything on Brexit and an underlying sense that they would sell their own grandmothers if they did have the chance , so can’t really be trusted.

    They need to wind the party up and start afresh.
    The Tory LD coalition still hurts eh Jonathan.. The sense of betrayal by your labour-lite cousins..

    I feel your pain...
  • Good article, David.

    I must be one of the few people who are pretty relaxed about 2019. Brexit either will or won't happen, it won't be as dramatic as advertised, either which way, and most people will simply get on with their lives and move on.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Brave to make predictions about 2019, whichever way one's jumping.

    A month or so ago I was reasonably confident of a second referendum occurring, now I think it's an outside chance. But we'll see.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    edited December 2018
    Jonathan said:

    On the topic of leadership I think it's certainly true that we a ready for a change of leadership in the Lib Dems - but the problem is that there's still no clear sign that any of the credible alternatives actually want the job... yet.

    When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas. :(

    The leader is irrelevant. The Lib Dem’s Labour's weakness is that they have no power to offer anything on Brexit and an underlying sense that they would sell their own grandmothers if they did have the chance , so can’t really be trusted.

    They need to wind the party up and start afresh.
    I tried this, but I don't think it quite works. Although the leader is a symptom not a cause of Labour's decay, he's still highly relevant.

    The last line remains profoundly true though.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517

    Good article, David.

    I must be one of the few people who are pretty relaxed about 2019. Brexit either will or won't happen, it won't be as dramatic as advertised, either which way, and most people will simply get on with their lives and move on.

    Who knows, Crossrail might even open. ;)

    (Hope all is well with you and your wife atm. Have you got the paintbrushes out yet?)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    edited December 2018

    A good piece though I disagree with sections of it - what is absolutely clear is that nothing is clear!

    I cannot see Labour MPs - or for that matter Tory MPs opposed to it - turning round and voting for May's deal. What is clear is that a majority of MPs will block no deal and with the Grieve amendment handing control to the Commons once May's deal falls you will see that happen fairly quickly. The government will then be faced with scenarios where it choses to ignore the expressed will of the majority of MPs and once again finds itself in contempt which surely doesn't leave it functional - they may not like being told what to do by the Commons but no government can serve as such without the support of MPs.

    This also helps May. She will not get her deal through parliament. Her deal is Brexit as defined by the referendum question. Her deal is the only form of Brexit on the table. So going over the heads of MPs will be her only remaining move. Whether a general election or fresh referendum is anyone's guess, but determined as she is to deliver her deal a fresh mandate is the only way to do so

    Can I please patiently remind everyone there is no time for a further referendum unless the EU extends Article 50.

    There are other reasons why it won't go ahead, including the very real risk of crashing out without a deal if we have one, but that's the key reason it's off the table. The only reason anyone argues otherwise is that there's not a snowflake's chance in hell of revoking Article 50 without it, and the desperate wishful thinking and fantasising about it by a number of politicians who can't believe people don't trust them is all that keeps the idea alive.

    And before anyone mentions Greece (1) we have procedures to follow, they didn't (2) we are a much larger, more complex country (3) the referendum there was essentially posturing for public relations so it didn't matter that it was about as reliable as a ConHome poll and (4) in case anyone hasn't noticed it backfired very spectacularly when having rejected a deal offered by the EU as unacceptably bad, they were forced to accept a much worse one.
  • Torby_FennelTorby_Fennel Posts: 345
    edited December 2018
    Jonathan said:



    The leader is irrelevant. The Lib Dem’s weakness is that they have no power to offer anything on Brexit and an underlying sense that they would sell their own grandmothers if they did have the chance , so can’t really be trusted.

    They need to wind the party up and start afresh.

    That's very much the Labour analysis of Lib Dems due to the coalition and your (Labour's) feeling that the Lib Dems should be a sub-branch. However... my perspective is very different as it was the coalition government that switched me over from being a Conservative voter to being a Lib Dem member and, now, active member.

    From helping out in the 2018 local elections I can see that there's a huge potential Lib Dem vote out there... in the two wards in my city that we actively contested (the only two we could afford to contest actively) we raised the party vote from lost deposit scores to 24% and 19% mostly at Labour's expense - and this is not a city where we have much history. Dotted around the country there are sparse little pockets of Lib Dem surges where local parties, with next to no resources and very few active, but enthusiastic, members, have got their acts together and are working hard. However... these little advances are entirely down to the local membership and local campaigns... there's no national campaign to speak of.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,887
    edited December 2018
    I largely agree with this analysis. However, the immediate alternative to Brexit is cancel Article 50, not hold a second referendum. If they do cancel it is likely to be for further consultations, which could include a second referendum. Also I would say the Remain position is coherent - the status quo. The Leave position is split between those who tolerate the Deal and those that want to crash and burn. Finally May's Deal if it happens is only the precursor to the substantive negotiations. We shouldn't expect May's position to hold on these.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,971

    Jonathan said:



    The leader is irrelevant. The Lib Dem’s weakness is that they have no power to offer anything on Brexit and an underlying sense that they would sell their own grandmothers if they did have the chance , so can’t really be trusted.

    They need to wind the party up and start afresh.

    That's very much the Labour analysis of Lib Dems due to the coalition and your (Labour's) feeling that the Lib Dems should be a sub-branch. However... my perspective is very different as it was the coalition government that switched me over from being a Conservative voter to being a Lib Dem member and, now, active member.

    From helping out in the 2018 local elections I can see that there's a huge potential Lib Dem vote out there... in the two wards in my city that we actively contested (the only two we could afford to contest actively) we raised the party vote from lost deposit scores to 24% and 19% mostly at Labour's expense - and this is not a city where we have much history. Dotted around the country there are sparse little pockets of Lib Dem surges where local parties, with next to no resources and very few active, but enthusiastic, members, have got their acts together and are working hard. However... these little advances are entirely down to the local membership and local campaigns... there's no national campaign to speak of.

    As you suggest, the old parties don't have nearly as much committed support nowadays; both retain their vote through interia, shored up by a voting system that suits them perfectly, and by want of alternative. Where people are offered a credible active alternative, all the signs are that they are willing to embrace it. As in Scotland.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,926

    Good article, David.

    I must be one of the few people who are pretty relaxed about 2019. Brexit either will or won't happen, it won't be as dramatic as advertised, either which way, and most people will simply get on with their lives and move on.

    I share your relaxation and political anomie. It’s hard to remain passionately interested in British politics when the players have demonstrated how dreadful they are, and the outcomes are not of great significance for the world or everyday life.
  • Jonathan said:

    On the topic of leadership I think it's certainly true that we a ready for a change of leadership in the Lib Dems - but the problem is that there's still no clear sign that any of the credible alternatives actually want the job... yet.

    When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas. :(

    The leader is irrelevant. The Lib Dem’s weakness is that they have no power to offer anything on Brexit and an underlying sense that they would sell their own grandmothers if they did have the chance , so can’t really be trusted.

    They need to wind the party up and start afresh.
    I think the “starting afresh” is currently stalled on social democrats like yourself not having the courage to leave the sclerotic Labour party. How else do you expect a viable centre-left force to emerge? Twelve Lib Dems renaming themselves the “Progressives” or something? Come off it.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,143
    edited December 2018
    I tend to agree with David’s predictions, but it does keep nagging me that there is no majority for May’s deal without some Labour MPs, and I’m struggling to see them go for it, even with a (artificially contrived) No Deal disaster situation beckoning.

    There seems to be around three blocs in Parliament.

    200 for May’s Deal
    150 for No Deal
    300 for Remain (via referendum*)

    These are approximate numbers, I think John Rentoul is keeping count somewhere on Twitter.

    Occam’s razor on presumed second prefs suggests that May wins if she can get No Deal taken off the table. But Remain wins if May’s Deal can be taken off the table. So does this come down to sequencing of votes in the HoC?

    *Yes I know referendum does not automatically mean Remain. But it is the only acceptable path toward Remain.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    Of course, one big betting event next year that will whatever happens be of huge significance to us is Juncker's replacement as President of the Commission.

    There's an article here on some of the runners and riders:

    https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20180905/world/whos-eu-a-look-at-the-front-runners-to-replace-jean-claude-juncker.688434

    Of course, what the Spitzenkandidat nonsense didn't allow for is what happens if there is a sudden surge in eurosceptic parties at the next election. Not likely, not impossible either. And that really would have profound implications for a free trade deal with the UK.

    Admittedly, it's hard to imagine anyone they put forward could be worse than the drink sodden tax fiddling pseudo-totalitarian failed wannabe dictator we've had for the last few years - but then people wondered whether Trump could be as bad as he was painted (note to Corbyn backers - he ended up being worse than expected).
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 787
    FF43 said:

    I largely agree with this analysis. However, the immediate alternative to Brexit is cancel Article 50, not hold a second referendum.

    That is fundamentally anti-democratic. The decision to Leave was made in the referendum on 23/6/16 and ratified by Parliament in March 2017 followed by activation of A50.

    If the deal is not ratified, the only valid option is "no deal". Parliament can't stop this without the co-operation of the government, because legislation would be required.
  • RoyalBlue said:

    Good article, David.

    I must be one of the few people who are pretty relaxed about 2019. Brexit either will or won't happen, it won't be as dramatic as advertised, either which way, and most people will simply get on with their lives and move on.

    I share your relaxation and political anomie. It’s hard to remain passionately interested in British politics when the players have demonstrated how dreadful they are, and the outcomes are not of great significance for the world or everyday life.
    Ah, post Christmas ennui strikes, it's a 'nothing to see here, move along' day.

    Only a matter of time before we return to 'betrayal of the greatest democratic expression in British history, there WILL be blood' I guess.
  • Despite the fact that David comes to radically different conclusions from me, I think this is a really good article. As David says, we share a lot of the analysis, but this coming year small changes could make big differences.

    David comes from the viewpoint of someone who feels party loyalty strongly. I don't feel it at all, never having belonged to a party. In a year when party loyalty is unusually weak and when the challenges that the country faces cut across party lines, are passionately felt and cannot be ducked, will party loyalty win through (in which case David will be correct) or will there be a breakdown? The answer is far from obvious.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,970
    Mr H,

    I generally agree. A second referendum is ruled out because of the inherent contradictions. The result won't matter, just having one will poison the political well for years to come. And what will be the questions?

    A suggested three-way option ... Leave with no-deal, Leave with the May deal, and Remain, could well end with a 20/35/45 split. A win for Remain with a minority share. Yet, to use the same question exposes the 'peoples' vote bollocks. We wanted a re-run because we didn't like the first result.

    If Mrs May steps down, there'll be huge pressure for a new GE.

    Why mot a female beauty pageant instead? It will be a superficial analysis anyway.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 12,631
    Thanks for the predictions David (and Alistair a few days ago)

    A lot ahead of us to keep us entertained anyway :D

    Happy New Year. :)
  • I expect Nigel Farage's chances of an honour depend largely on Robert Mueller. If he survives that investigation, I expect his honour will not be long deferred.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    He's forgetting Nicolae Ceaucescu and Robert Mugabe in that list.
  • CD13 said:


    A suggested three-way option ... Leave with no-deal, Leave with the May deal, and Remain, could well end with a 20/35/45 split. A win for Remain with a minority share.

    You can fix that with two rounds. (1. What's Brexit? 2. Now that you've decided what Brexit is, do you want to do it?)

    However, the practical problem is how to get stuff through the twin veto points of parliament and the PM, and I don't think either of those are keen to ask the voters if they want No Deal.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,848

    Unfortunately betting on this ends up being a bet on Theresa May's mental state, which is hard to read as she doesn't tweet much or write poetry or anything.

    You have to read her mind through her use of the medium of contemporary dance.....

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    CD13 said:

    Why mot a female beauty pageant instead? It will be a superficial analysis anyway.

    Because it wouldn't resolve anything. The biggest tit from last year is Corbyn, and he can't make up his mind what he wants.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 787

    I expect Nigel Farage's chances of an honour depend largely on Robert Mueller. If he survives that investigation, I expect his honour will not be long deferred.
    Nigel Farage deserves an honour once the UK actually leaves the EU, for "political services to the UK".
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 6,220

    Despite the fact that David comes to radically different conclusions from me, I think this is a really good article. As David says, we share a lot of the analysis, but this coming year small changes could make big differences.

    David comes from the viewpoint of someone who feels party loyalty strongly. I don't feel it at all, never having belonged to a party. In a year when party loyalty is unusually weak and when the challenges that the country faces cut across party lines, are passionately felt and cannot be ducked, will party loyalty win through (in which case David will be correct) or will there be a breakdown? The answer is far from obvious.

    I think that you have to allow that David's projection requires Tory party loyalty, but Labour party disloyalty to pass May's Deal. Personally, I think Labour party solidarity on this is far more intact than Tory. Even centrists like Liz Kendall are voting with their leader against the Deal. David is viewing things through blue tinted spectacles.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 6,220
    daodao said:

    I expect Nigel Farage's chances of an honour depend largely on Robert Mueller. If he survives that investigation, I expect his honour will not be long deferred.
    Nigel Farage deserves an honour once the UK actually leaves the EU, for "political services to the UK".
    Surely for political services to Russia?
  • PeterCPeterC Posts: 1,107

    I tend to agree with David’s predictions, but it does keep nagging me that there is no majority for May’s deal without some Labour MPs, and I’m struggling to see them go for it, even with a (artificially contrived) No Deal disaster situation beckoning.

    There seems to be around three blocs in Parliament.

    200 for May’s Deal
    150 for No Deal
    300 for Remain (via referendum*)

    These are approximate numbers, I think John Rentoul is keeping count somewhere on Twitter.

    Occam’s razor on presumed second prefs suggests that May wins if she can get No Deal taken off the table. But Remain wins if May’s Deal can be taken off the table. So does this come down to sequencing of votes in the HoC?

    *Yes I know referendum does not automatically mean Remain. But it is the only acceptable path toward Remain.

    No Deal cannot be taken off the table because it is the legal default. The key unknown is what will May do if she reaches the cliff edge - jump or revoke. Every MP will need to take his or her own view on this and act accordingly.
  • For all those that feel that the administrative aspect of EU citizens applying for permanent residency rights is trivial, consider cases like this:

  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,838
    daodao said:

    FF43 said:

    I largely agree with this analysis. However, the immediate alternative to Brexit is cancel Article 50, not hold a second referendum.

    That is fundamentally anti-democratic. The decision to Leave was made in the referendum on 23/6/16 and ratified by Parliament in March 2017 followed by activation of A50.

    If the deal is not ratified, the only valid option is "no deal". Parliament can't stop this without the co-operation of the government, because legislation would be required.
    No deal doesn't feel democratic to me. It is only necessary because we are trying to Brexit very quickly. There was nothing about timescale on the ballot paper. We could revoke Article 50 and let the next general election decide what form of Brexit we take. What is wrong with that?
  • So David's predictions are basically "nothing has changed"? Was it written by David or Mrs May?

    Once again we have the idea that it is ALL about Westminster

    The thread was all about Westminster because I cut it off there after 1500 words. I could have gone on. Also implied in it are the probability of 2, and the possibility of 3 or even more PMs next year; of at least 1 leadership contest and new party leaders; of the start of the post-Brexit EU talks (I don't expect these to get far) and of a possible very sharp shock to the economy.

    To have then gone on to (1) devolved politics, (2) international politics, and (3) the economy, home and abroad, could easily have taken 5000 words. I have, over time, been prepared to write longer pieces, having increased from an initial advised length of around 500 words, but I do think it'd pushing it to have upped that tenfold.

    In any case, each of those three other areas could reasonably form a thread in their own right. To mix them all up just muddles discussion and/or leaves areas unexplored.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383

    Good morning, everyone. I'm glad to see the cave rescuers honoured, and the other gongs given to emergency services personnel. Quite cheered me up!
    On topic, I fear Brexit is going to happen, although it will be on May's Deal, very much for the reasons Mr H gives. By the summer though problems will be developing, particularly around holiday travel and they will be loudly construed in part of the Press as Europes Revenge, which will sour the situation even more.
    I'm sure Cable will go, probably shortly after Brexit; it hasn't helped the LD's being behind the SNP in Parliamentary seats, but neither Cable nor the back office has covered itself with glory and a new leader...... not sure it will be Swinson, ....... will have to follow Jo Grimonds advice and 'march toward the sound of gunfire'! The LD's will continue to do well in local government elections though and just might do very well in May.
    Both the other two leaders will carry on, although under threat.
    TBH, I don't think there will be a GE; the function of the Conservative party is to 'keep our side in power', and somehow that is what they'll do, although a Private Members Bill to bring Norn Ireland into line with both rUK and the RoI on abortion might just pass and send the DUP into space.

    Personally I'm hoping that I shall have an operation this year which will sort out my lumbar stenosis and in due course give me both legs again. I also hope that this time next year I shall be in a warmer climate.

    The honours list is pathetic. Baubles and stupid names for mainly useless twats that need bribed or have confidence issues. They throw in a few sheeple nowadays to pretend it is anything other than a con for their chums to milk the system even more. What a shithole this country really has sunk to when you see the absolute wuckfits that get them.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383
    Foxy said:

    Despite the fact that David comes to radically different conclusions from me, I think this is a really good article. As David says, we share a lot of the analysis, but this coming year small changes could make big differences.

    David comes from the viewpoint of someone who feels party loyalty strongly. I don't feel it at all, never having belonged to a party. In a year when party loyalty is unusually weak and when the challenges that the country faces cut across party lines, are passionately felt and cannot be ducked, will party loyalty win through (in which case David will be correct) or will there be a breakdown? The answer is far from obvious.

    I think that you have to allow that David's projection requires Tory party loyalty, but Labour party disloyalty to pass May's Deal. Personally, I think Labour party solidarity on this is far more intact than Tory. Even centrists like Liz Kendall are voting with their leader against the Deal. David is viewing things through blue tinted spectacles.
    very deep blue
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,970
    Dr Fox,

    Labour loyalists do put up with a lot, probably more than the Tories who are more fractious. But Labour has nearly half of its members in London nowadays and is more in danger of a complete split. Not immediately, but a few years hence and it will be a gradual process.

    The LDs will recover, but their MO was of being conciliatory, not extreme, a position they have on Brexit. Once that is done and dusted (as far as it can be), they can diverge from the Greens and be 'Homo Domesticus' again.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383
    ydoethur said:

    He's forgetting Nicolae Ceaucescu and Robert Mugabe in that list.
    to name but a few of the losers, criminals and ne'er do wells
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    He's forgetting Nicolae Ceaucescu and Robert Mugabe in that list.
    to name but a few of the losers, criminals and ne'er do wells
    Fred the Shred?
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 787

    daodao said:

    FF43 said:

    I largely agree with this analysis. However, the immediate alternative to Brexit is cancel Article 50, not hold a second referendum.

    That is fundamentally anti-democratic. The decision to Leave was made in the referendum on 23/6/16 and ratified by Parliament in March 2017 followed by activation of A50.

    If the deal is not ratified, the only valid option is "no deal". Parliament can't stop this without the co-operation of the government, because legislation would be required.
    No deal doesn't feel democratic to me. It is only necessary because we are trying to Brexit very quickly. There was nothing about timescale on the ballot paper. We could revoke Article 50 and let the next general election decide what form of Brexit we take. What is wrong with that?
    The government would have to be removed and May replaced as PM in order to revoke A50.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255

    daodao said:

    FF43 said:

    I largely agree with this analysis. However, the immediate alternative to Brexit is cancel Article 50, not hold a second referendum.

    That is fundamentally anti-democratic. The decision to Leave was made in the referendum on 23/6/16 and ratified by Parliament in March 2017 followed by activation of A50.

    If the deal is not ratified, the only valid option is "no deal". Parliament can't stop this without the co-operation of the government, because legislation would be required.
    No deal doesn't feel democratic to me. It is only necessary because we are trying to Brexit very quickly. There was nothing about timescale on the ballot paper. We could revoke Article 50 and let the next general election decide what form of Brexit we take. What is wrong with that?
    I would point out that the reason we are 'trying to Brexit quickly' is because that's the timeframe under A50. In fact, the withdrawal agreement is looking to nearly double the actual tiemframe of leaving. So it's not as though it was unexpected.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 6,220

    For all those that feel that the administrative aspect of EU citizens applying for permanent residency rights is trivial, consider cases like this:

    Yes, it does look as if my German sister in law, resident in UK for 30 years and mother of 3 UK citizens has to apply for residence, or risk being an illegal on 1 Jan 2021 even under the WA. I can see that it is going to be another Windrush as the Home Office has to successfully process 4000 applications per day over that period.

    They could have simplified it considerably by exempting spouses of UK citizens automatically.
  • I am well aware that there is no time for a referendum without an extension to A50 - the EU haven't yet been asked if they will grant it. As for the question on such a referendum you'd have to look at the scenario in which such a Vote was called - and the only way I can see is to get May's deal through.

    In that scenario the question would be simple - should the UK enact the May deal and leave the EU or should the UK reject the May deal and remain in the EU? A leave vote enacts May's deal, a remain vote revokes Article 50. The sweetener to the EU in granting an extension to A50 could be that the government would enact the result immediately.

    As for no deal, it's dead. A majority of MPs will reject it which means choosing one of the alternatives - May's deal or revoke. They will not let the UK crash out.
  • On the General election issue, given the limited number of ways in which this can come about, on balance is it not more probable that there will not be one? Reasons: because it will never be in enough MPs interest to hold one in a time when the results both individually and collectively are so unpredictable; plus, from a DUP perspective, (and they remain at this moment kingmakers or at least king keepers) what possible alternative government is going to be an improvement on this one for a unionist? This together with the difficulties of writing a manifesto which actually has a coherent policy about the detail of the post WA phase suggests to me that the GE prediction for 2019 is wide of the mark.

    I think David Herdson is spot on with his 1,2 and 3.
  • On the topic of leadership I think it's certainly true that we a ready for a change of leadership in the Lib Dems - but the problem is that there's still no clear sign that any of the credible alternatives actually want the job... yet.

    When I was visiting my parents over Christmas my mum, when Paddy Ashdown's death was in the news, asked me who is the present Lib Dem leader. She follows current affairs but she genuinely didn't know... says it all, alas. :(

    Could be worse. There's been at least one instance of someone effectively asking Vince Cable who the Lib Dem leader was (it was actually phrased as commiseration that he would have made a good leader).
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383
    tlg86 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Mr Herdsons analysis is very conservative and would have stood up very well prior to 2015. However, with tensions raised and the politics of populism dominant, I think there is a bit more chaos in the system. The reckless brinkmanship of May is one example. So it could play out as David says, but there are many rolls of the dice here.

    If reality starts to bite and Brexit hits people in their wallets, we could see some bigger changes. Until them people will carry on arguing the toss and trading opinions.

    I don't think David's analysis is in the least bit conservative. He's saying that May's deal will eventually pass, partly with the support of Labour MPs. I think that's quite a bold prediction.
    More like wishing on a star, he is dreaming. The Tories are heading for the toilet where they belong, flush the nasties as soon as possible. Anybody has to be better than these stupid, evil halfwitted cretins ruining the country.
  • I wonder on point 8 if the Tory party is to become the ENP. There is certainly a large base of its supporters who appear to be for this. The Scottish referendum almost destroyed the Scottish Labour party who could never decide who to support. Will they face the same issue with the EU referendum. The Lib Dems will survive and maybe thrive as they have a consistent message.


    The newspaper headlines today are claiming that a hard Brexit would be only bad and not really bad. Is this the limits of the country's ambition for 2019? It is s**t but it could be worse.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    He's forgetting Nicolae Ceaucescu and Robert Mugabe in that list.
    to name but a few of the losers, criminals and ne'er do wells
    Fred the Shred?
    another cnut, what makes you think I would care a shit about that evil moron
  • A good piece though I disagree with sections of it - what is absolutely clear is that nothing is clear!

    I cannot see Labour MPs - or for that matter Tory MPs opposed to it - turning round and voting for May's deal. What is clear is that a majority of MPs will block no deal and with the Grieve amendment handing control to the Commons once May's deal falls you will see that happen fairly quickly. The government will then be faced with scenarios where it choses to ignore the expressed will of the majority of MPs and once again finds itself in contempt which surely doesn't leave it functional - they may not like being told what to do by the Commons but no government can serve as such without the support of MPs.

    This also helps May. She will not get her deal through parliament. Her deal is Brexit as defined by the referendum question. Her deal is the only form of Brexit on the table. So going over the heads of MPs will be her only remaining move. Whether a general election or fresh referendum is anyone's guess, but determined as she is to deliver her deal a fresh mandate is the only way to do so

    But that fails to answer the question as to what this fourth option is, given that Remain is utterly unacceptable to her Party (and a large portion of the electorate, who mandated it), and No Deal is unacceptable as a long-term solution for practical reasons. Where does this other option come from? Putting conceptual options like 'Norway Plus' is meaningless when there's no guarantee that they're deliverable (and once you start down that road, you could have any number of options on the ballot paper, with ever-increasing unicorn ratings). There is only one deal negotiated and certain of being able to be delivered. MPs might not like it but ultimately, they'll dislike it less than any other viable outcome.
  • Oh dear. Magic Grandpa's homeless chap:

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    He's forgetting Nicolae Ceaucescu and Robert Mugabe in that list.
    to name but a few of the losers, criminals and ne'er do wells
    Fred the Shred?
    another cnut, what makes you think I would care a shit about that evil moron
    I was assuming you didn't actually Malc, I just mentioned him as another (checks for libel lawyers) of the 'ne'er do wells.' The key reason was he was the only ummm, non-mass murderer or paedophile I could think of to be stripped of his bauble, although I'm sure there are others.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,848

    I tend to agree with David’s predictions, but it does keep nagging me that there is no majority for May’s deal without some Labour MPs, and I’m struggling to see them go for it, even with a (artificially contrived) No Deal disaster situation beckoning.

    There seems to be around three blocs in Parliament.

    200 for May’s Deal
    150 for No Deal
    300 for Remain (via referendum*)

    These are approximate numbers, I think John Rentoul is keeping count somewhere on Twitter.

    Occam’s razor on presumed second prefs suggests that May wins if she can get No Deal taken off the table. But Remain wins if May’s Deal can be taken off the table. So does this come down to sequencing of votes in the HoC?

    *Yes I know referendum does not automatically mean Remain. But it is the only acceptable path toward Remain.

    Early 2019 depends on how many of those 300 are prepared to cling on to delivering Remain in the face of the 52% majority - and in many cases, in the face of the voters of their constituency.

    Some will continue to think they know best. Good luck selling that to them, in an election maybe just weeks away. But some - my guess is enough - will think they tried their damndest, but stopping Brexit was just out of reach. So go with May's deal, whch is the least unpalatable Brexit they will need to consider. Especially when set against No Deal Brexit - which they will not want to own.

    But let's be clear. No Deal Brexit is only still a viable thing because of the actions of those 300, still trying to stop the tide coming in. They should take some comfort from Cnut's actions - his point was to demonstrate that the tide was going to come in, regardless of his actions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,255
    edited December 2018

    I am well aware that there is no time for a referendum without an extension to A50 - the EU haven't yet been asked if they will grant it. As for the question on such a referendum you'd have to look at the scenario in which such a Vote was called - and the only way I can see is to get May's deal through.

    In that scenario the question would be simple - should the UK enact the May deal and leave the EU or should the UK reject the May deal and remain in the EU? A leave vote enacts May's deal, a remain vote revokes Article 50. The sweetener to the EU in granting an extension to A50 could be that the government would enact the result immediately.

    As for no deal, it's dead. A majority of MPs will reject it which means choosing one of the alternatives - May's deal or revoke. They will not let the UK crash out.

    Can I again point out that the wording of a referendum question is not up to MPs? It's a matter for the Electoral Commission, who are answerable to the courts. And I can foresee a 'Remain/Deal' referendum being subject to successful legal challenge on the basis that one of those options has already been rejected.
  • ydoethur said:

    Of course, one big betting event next year that will whatever happens be of huge significance to us is Juncker's replacement as President of the Commission.

    There's an article here on some of the runners and riders:

    https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20180905/world/whos-eu-a-look-at-the-front-runners-to-replace-jean-claude-juncker.688434

    Of course, what the Spitzenkandidat nonsense didn't allow for is what happens if there is a sudden surge in eurosceptic parties at the next election. Not likely, not impossible either. And that really would have profound implications for a free trade deal with the UK.

    Admittedly, it's hard to imagine anyone they put forward could be worse than the drink sodden tax fiddling pseudo-totalitarian failed wannabe dictator we've had for the last few years - but then people wondered whether Trump could be as bad as he was painted (note to Corbyn backers - he ended up being worse than expected).

    Yes, it's one of life's little ironies (and one of the subjects I cut from the piece) that Britain's second-most meaningful lasting contribution to the EU (after the Single Market), is the formation of the ECR group, which could prove the swing vote between the EPP-Socialist-ALDE old guard and the radical, populist and nutcase awkward squad after the Euro-elections.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,257
    edited December 2018
    The battle of the Titans. Herdson V Meeks. It's interesting how little the personnel at the top seems to matter. Parliament for once has the power and the leadership counts for very little.

    My own feeling is that if Corbyn resigned the dynamic would change overnight. We might even find the parliamentary u-bend mysteriously clears. We would certainly be spared the absurd sight of Jacob Rees Mogg and Arlene Phillips claiming to speak for the majority. By losing the extreme left we'd also lose the much more terrifying extreme right which for the last six months has been running this circus.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383
    I see that Tories actually realise how bad their evil policies are once they are personally affected , now that Nigel Evans has been beggared he has a damascene conversion and admits he was wrong to vote for the Tory policy. Poetic justice, if only more of them could be hoist by their own petards.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 37,912

    The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46700743

    The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.
    It's not really as many nations have forms of civic awards, they're just called different things and they don't tend to add prefixes or post nomial letters. It's also entirely harmless as gongs don't confer any power or privilege anymore.

    You'd have a better argument with peerages since those actually include power. Since gongs don't I don't really understand why people get so upset. I wouldn't be surprised if we keep them even after the monarchy is abolished - systems can be improved, but as we have one for recognising service there's no need to tear it down for a new one.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785
    edited December 2018
    Question I don't know the answer to and would be interested in opinions, aside from the likelihood of it happening:

    Imagine TMay loses the meaningful vote with (say) 80 Con rebels. SNP/LD/Lab-remain offer to pass the deal subject to a Deal vs Remain referendum. Also imagine (bear with me) TMay then agrees and puts this to a (whipped) vote.

    In the resulting Deal+Referendum vote, how many Con rebels are there?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    He's forgetting Nicolae Ceaucescu and Robert Mugabe in that list.
    to name but a few of the losers, criminals and ne'er do wells
    Fred the Shred?
    another cnut, what makes you think I would care a shit about that evil moron
    I was assuming you didn't actually Malc, I just mentioned him as another (checks for libel lawyers) of the 'ne'er do wells.' The key reason was he was the only ummm, non-mass murderer or paedophile I could think of to be stripped of his bauble, although I'm sure there are others.
    He was a particularly bad one for sure, just amazing that crooks like that do not get jailed. Unfortunately money and chums in high places talks in this country. I will be Mr Angry all day now.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,202
    Very much the predictions I'd have expected from David Herdson who's long been hawkish on May's deal being the only credible option.

    But the one think I'd like more detail on is what happens when th a Government declares no deal it's central planning assumption. Unless it's a bluff, I reckon that Gauke, Clark, Hammond, Rudd, etc quit the cabinet at that point, and the likes of Soubry, Wollaston, Boles quit the party. The markets go haywire, a company of the stature of Airbus announce that with regret they are implementing their contingency plan to leave the U.K. - how can the government survive all of that?

    That would be one of the most significant moments of the whole process and I'm not sure the Government could survive that moment - but it's implied that it's not a big deal above. In the hard Brexiteer mindset anyway, but it could be riots on the streets stuff. How do you see that point being handled David?
  • For all those that feel that the administrative aspect of EU citizens applying for permanent residency rights is trivial, consider cases like this:

    So she came here before 1948, well before there was an EEC or Freedom of Movement. Either she lived here illegally - or sorted out her immigration status decades ago, in which case she'll pay nothing.
  • But that fails to answer the question as to what this fourth option is, given that Remain is utterly unacceptable to her Party (and a large portion of the electorate, who mandated it), and No Deal is unacceptable as a long-term solution for practical reasons. Where does this other option come from? Putting conceptual options like 'Norway Plus' is meaningless when there's no guarantee that they're deliverable (and once you start down that road, you could have any number of options on the ballot paper, with ever-increasing unicorn ratings). There is only one deal negotiated and certain of being able to be delivered. MPs might not like it but ultimately, they'll dislike it less than any other viable outcome.

    I entirely agree - May's deal is Brexit as defined by the referendum question. The only reason it is dead in the water in the Commons is that millions of people seem to have hallucinated that "leave the European Union" meant something else and too many Tory MPs agree.

    Practically speaking there are three options. Pass May's deal and leave the EU. Don't pass May's deal and leave the EU. Don't leave the EU. At the moment none of these are acceptable to parliament. May hoped to run down the clock and say "my deal or no deal" but the ECJ have scuppered that - "my deal or don't leave" is what most MPs have in mind. Forget the "democratic outrage" angle against revoke, whatever happens now will enrage millions of voters - including millions of leave voters who incorr3ctky consider May's deal to not be leaving.

    Which is why another vote is needed. Personally I wouldn't go for a referendum despite me campaigning for one - it's a tactical ploy to bring focus back to the democratic deficit for all three options. Both parties need to put up or shut up. A general election and be very clear what you stand for. That such a general election would split both parties is an added bonus.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 37,912
    While Mr Herdson is often right I do have to agree that his assumption of why the deal will get through eventually is flawed. As he himself notes on a separate issue if the will is there even the rules don't matter as much. On alternatives to the deal there are big issues as he notes but if the will is against the deal while they will need to settle on something and that is hard it seems more likely than backing down on this - if people were spooked by their fanatical no deal and remain risking No deal stances we'd hear whispers about it at least. People are still hardening.
  • daodaodaodao Posts: 787
    There has been a blockade between the UK and continental Europe before, and the UK has survived. No deal is not the end of the world.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,257
    edited December 2018
    malcolmg said:

    I see that Tories actually realise how bad their evil policies are once they are personally affected , now that Nigel Evans has been beggared he has a damascene conversion and admits he was wrong to vote for the Tory policy. Poetic justice, if only more of them could be hoist by their own petards.

    Is 'beggared' a Scottish spelling?
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    kle4 said:

    The honours list does seem to contain many people previously honoured, now having their baubles upgraded. For instance, just one BBC page includes CBEs for: Gruffalo author Julia Donaldson MBE; stage actress Sophie Okonedo OBE; violinist Nicola Benedetti MBE; artists Tacita Dean OBE and Gillian Wearing OBE. Is this usual or has the honours committee simply run out of ideas?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46700743

    The whole system needs scrapping. It is beyond anachronistic.
    It's not really as many nations have forms of civic awards, they're just called different things and they don't tend to add prefixes or post nomial letters. It's also entirely harmless as gongs don't confer any power or privilege anymore.

    You'd have a better argument with peerages since those actually include power. Since gongs don't I don't really understand why people get so upset. I wouldn't be surprised if we keep them even after the monarchy is abolished - systems can be improved, but as we have one for recognising service there's no need to tear it down for a new one.
    I take your point. Peerages in that case, but perhaps the knighthoods could be renamed as something less anachronistic and snobbish (unless you are suggesting that those knighted will provide their own swords, horses and men-at-arms when the sovereign leads them into battle)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 20,383
    ydoethur said:

    I am well aware that there is no time for a referendum without an extension to A50 - the EU haven't yet been asked if they will grant it. As for the question on such a referendum you'd have to look at the scenario in which such a Vote was called - and the only way I can see is to get May's deal through.

    In that scenario the question would be simple - should the UK enact the May deal and leave the EU or should the UK reject the May deal and remain in the EU? A leave vote enacts May's deal, a remain vote revokes Article 50. The sweetener to the EU in granting an extension to A50 could be that the government would enact the result immediately.

    As for no deal, it's dead. A majority of MPs will reject it which means choosing one of the alternatives - May's deal or revoke. They will not let the UK crash out.

    Can I again point out that the wording of a referendum question is not up to MPs? It's a matter for the Electoral Commission, who are answerable to the courts. And I can foresee a 'Remain/Deal' referendum being subject to successful legal challenge on the basis that one of those options has already been rejected.
    ydoethur, you are on a roll, another bunch of useless toothless wasters. LD's just got fined about £50 by them for fiddling election expenses, it is pathetic. Another bunch of old chums to pay lip service so they can pretend that they actually have a democratic system rather than the banana republic one that is in place.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,731
    I've been checking David's predictions against the consensus of punters as reflected in Betfair odds. They mostly agree with him, except 5: "There will be a General Election next year" which is rated at a 38% chance.

    There is most agreement on 8: "There will be no major realignment of the parties". 96% chance this is correct (or at least that it doesn't lead to a new party having most seats).

    The most marginal prediction is 2: "The government will get its Brexit deal approved" Less than 56% chance. (Depends on chance of no deal crash out).

    This is because prediction 1: "Britain will leave on or shortly after March 29 is a 56% chance. (44% that it will be by 29 March. 12 % that it will be in Q2). We will only leave on that timescale if either the Brexit deal is passed or we crash out with no deal.

    7: At least one party leader will go in 2019 looks is greater than a 65% chance based on May alone.
    May 65% chance, Cable 37%+ chance (first to go), Corbyn 31% chance.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 21,848
    On point 5, the DUP forcing an election by backing a VONC. I'm not so sure. The one thing a General Election puts at risk is the DUP's ability to use their position to deliver pork to NI. They might still be holding the balance of power after a 2019 General. But far more likely, the exquisitely manufactured machinery of balance that gave them their clout after 2017 would disintegrate.

    And the second to last thing they would want to see is Theresa May returned until 2024 with a working majority. Worse only than a slim majority Corbyn government jettisoning NI from the UK and into the arms of the Republic (after all, NI's sitting MPs are only de facto Tories, so what's not to love?).

    I can see the DUP waiting to see who May's successor would be, and what deal they can extract to enable that new PM to stay in office a while. Must be worth a few billion? Maybe delivering that bridge to Scotland, eh Boris? But their price for this lease of life is that the PM goes - and goes soon.
This discussion has been closed.