I think this is spot on unless there's a black swan.
As things stand, there's no way for Labour to go up from here: Corbyn is merrily trashing his appeal to centrist-Remainers and showing no sign of winning over former Tory voters.
But who knows what will happen after March 29th. If the whole of Kent becomes one big Operation Stack, or the newspapers find just one child death in hospital as a result of medicine shortages, all bets are off.
Which means we're in a situation where Labour NEED Brexit to happen to get a majority.
Maybe Magic Grandpa isn't so stupid after all.
Morning all,
There has been plenty of speculation and anonymous quotes from 'sources' to the effect that Jezza's closest aides think a massively messy Brexit, owned by the Tories, and the resulting chaos, is the perfect opportunity for them to win.
Indeed. Neither party are acting in the national interest.
Too busy thinking about leadership plans and elections.
Instances where politicians have acted in the national interest over Party interest are as rare as unicorn shit.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
You're changing your tune.
No I still back the Deal but No Deal for the Tories is better than revoking Brexit
Any chance some Tory MPs might consider what's best for the country?
A silly point - however misguided most MPs may be on a range of issues I have no doubt they all believe that their views are in the national interest. Even Jeremy Corbyn!
But what's 'in the national interest' though? Some think that liberal democracy and higher standards of living have made us rather soft, and only impoverishment and a return to a more feudal way of ordering things can address this civilizational sickness.
The number of people who support No Deal now, and the number of people who would support it two months after it came about, if nothing but short-term micro-deals were put in place to mitigate it, is unlikely to be the same.
It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
If they revoked Brexit *and* slung out the ERG then the Tories would become the de facto new centre party and would take votes from Corbyn's Labour.
You have no understanding of the Conservative Party.
The Conservative party was "the European party", as Norman St John-Stevas called it, and will be again.
No Deal being judged better than May's deal is not a dereliction of duty by MPs. The dereliction of duty was by Govt. two or more years ago, refusing to plan effectively for No Deal. The Govt's purpose was to blackmail MPs into not, in all conscience, being able to support No Deal. If No Deal is where we do end up, it will be an epic miscalculation.
I think that 'effective no deal planning' can join 'jobs first brexit' in unicorn corner.
I think this is spot on unless there's a black swan.
As things stand, there's no way for Labour to go up from here: Corbyn is merrily trashing his appeal to centrist-Remainers and showing no sign of winning over former Tory voters.
But who knows what will happen after March 29th. If the whole of Kent becomes one big Operation Stack, or the newspapers find just one child death in hospital as a result of medicine shortages, all bets are off.
Which means we're in a situation where Labour NEED Brexit to happen to get a majority.
Maybe Magic Grandpa isn't so stupid after all.
Morning all,
There has been plenty of speculation and anonymous quotes from 'sources' to the effect that Jezza's closest aides think a massively messy Brexit, owned by the Tories, and the resulting chaos, is the perfect opportunity for them to win.
Indeed. Neither party are acting in the national interest.
Too busy thinking about leadership plans and elections.
Instances where politicians have acted in the national interest over Party interest are as rare as unicorn shit.
Sadly that's because they would claim, and probably believe, that party interest always aligns with the national interest.
Honestly the most interesting vote 're the deal is Stephen Lloyd's, resigning the party whip to vote for a deal that won't pass no matter what he does, when others previously assumed to be persuadable are coming out against perhaps in part because it's not worth sticking your neck out for a dead deal.
They are still thinking that the problem is with the political declaration, rather than with the withdrawal agreement itself.
More likely they know it's not but that's the only bit they might be able to change. Maybe it's enough of a fig leaf to give cover to a few, but enough are clear the problems are the legal text so i doubt it. Particularly since everyone knows it's a fig leaf.
May knows she's not getting any meaningful changes. She knew that full well after she got Salzburged a second time last month. Remember people were talking about a special EUCO summit just for Brexit? What happened to that?
The EU is doing the absolute mininum it can to help her. And why would they lift a finger? Since they don't believe she has a snowball's chance in hell getting it through Parliament, they're not going to risk going out on a limb for her, making a meaningful concession, and then she lose anyway.
Some people think that although we don't want a deal, we will nevertheless be able to sign some agreements with the EU on the basics, etc. ie a deal. Yet some people believe these things are completely different.
That is precisely why "No Deal" is such a pejorative term - it is intended to shape opinion and lead some by the nose to conclude that chaos would ensue because there would be no arrangements covering even the basics. The choice using non perjorative language is between leaving under "May's Deal" and "World Trade Terms (or WTO Terms for short).
Under the latter, there is an obligation on both the UK and EU to act in good faith to reach basic agreements (i.e. deals) to give effect to their international obligations under the WTO.
"The WTO has done good work in recent years to make it illegal for countries to impose new non tariff barriers to impede trade. The EU has built these requirements into its own law codes. People on both sides of the Channel will continue to honour contracts and buy and sell to each other after our exit. To suggest otherwise is silly scaremongering."
The number of people who support No Deal now, and the number of people who would support it two months after it came about, if nothing but short-term micro-deals were put in place to mitigate it, is unlikely to be the same.
It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
If they revoked Brexit *and* slung out the ERG then the Tories would become the de facto new centre party and would take votes from Corbyn's Labour.
Too few.
Most people who vote Labour do so because they admire Corbyn, or they are Labour loyalists.
They are still thinking that the problem is with the political declaration, rather than with the withdrawal agreement itself.
More likely they know it's not but that's the only bit they might be able to change. Maybe it's enough of a fig leaf to give cover to a few, but enough are clear the problems are the legal text so i doubt it. Particularly since everyone knows it's a fig leaf.
May knows she's not getting any meaningful changes. She knew that full well after she got Salzburged a second time last month. Remember people were talking about a special EUCO summit just for Brexit? What happened to that?
The EU is doing the absolute mininum it can to help her. And why would they lift a finger? Since they don't believe she has a snowball's chance in hell getting it through Parliament, they're not going to risk going out on a limb for her, making a meaningful concession, and then she lose anyway.
They could afford to make a concession but I agree it's not in their interest, particularly when me as half of our parliament is working to remain anyway. The EU will not like no deal, but they've gone as far as they care to to prevent it.
I think this is spot on unless there's a black swan.
As things stand, there's no way for Labour to go up from here: Corbyn is merrily trashing his appeal to centrist-Remainers and showing no sign of winning over former Tory voters.
But who knows what will happen after March 29th. If the whole of Kent becomes one big Operation Stack, or the newspapers find just one child death in hospital as a result of medicine shortages, all bets are off.
Which means we're in a situation where Labour NEED Brexit to happen to get a majority.
Maybe Magic Grandpa isn't so stupid after all.
Morning all,
There has been plenty of speculation and anonymous quotes from 'sources' to the effect that Jezza's closest aides think a massively messy Brexit, owned by the Tories, and the resulting chaos, is the perfect opportunity for them to win.
Indeed. Neither party are acting in the national interest.
Too busy thinking about leadership plans and elections.
Instances where politicians have acted in the national interest over Party interest are as rare as unicorn shit.
Sadly that's because they would claim, and probably believe, that party interest always aligns with the national interest.
Honestly the most interesting vote 're the deal is Stephen Lloyd's, resigning the party whip to vote for a deal that won't pass no matter what he does, when others previously assumed to be persuadable are coming out against perhaps in part because it's not worth sticking your neck out for a dead deal.
Yes, you get the odd honourable politician who will act in the national interest, usually at great cost to their personal careers, but it is hard to think when a government last collectively put national interest above party interest
A reminder that the last round of WTO trade talks, the Doha round, collapse amongst ignominy and infighting eleven years ago, and reform has been completely stalled ever since.
An organization that's effectively been moribund for over a decade is our great white hope.
I think this is spot on unless there's a black swan.
As things stand, there's no way for Labour to go up from here: Corbyn is merrily trashing his appeal to centrist-Remainers and showing no sign of winning over former Tory voters.
But who knows what will happen after March 29th. If the whole of Kent becomes one big Operation Stack, or the newspapers find just one child death in hospital as a result of medicine shortages, all bets are off.
Which means we're in a situation where Labour NEED Brexit to happen to get a majority.
Maybe Magic Grandpa isn't so stupid after all.
Morning all,
There has been plenty of speculation and anonymous quotes from 'sources' to the effect that Jezza's closest aides think a massively messy Brexit, owned by the Tories, and the resulting chaos, is the perfect opportunity for them to win.
Indeed. Neither party are acting in the national interest.
Too busy thinking about leadership plans and elections.
Instances where politicians have acted in the national interest over Party interest are as rare as unicorn shit.
Sadly that's because they would claim, and probably believe, that party interest always aligns with the national interest.
Honestly the most interesting vote 're the deal is Stephen Lloyd's, resigning the party whip to vote for a deal that won't pass no matter what he does, when others previously assumed to be persuadable are coming out against perhaps in part because it's not worth sticking your neck out for a dead deal.
Yes, you get the odd honourable politician who will act in the national interest, usually at great cost to their personal careers, but it is hard to think when a government last collectively put national interest above party interest
If ever there was an issue which should prompt Mps, gov or opposition, to rebel no matter the cost you'd think it would be thus one. Nevertheless here we are.
The number of people who support No Deal now, and the number of people who would support it two months after it came about, if nothing but short-term micro-deals were put in place to mitigate it, is unlikely to be the same.
It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
Why - if we go No Deal and it doesn't work I suspect the Remainer Home Counties will be returning 80+ Lib Dem MPs by itself...
There might be a couple in Surrey. But, not in Kent, Essex, Buckinghamshire, or Hertfordshire.
They are still thinking that the problem is with the political declaration, rather than with the withdrawal agreement itself.
More likely they know it's not but that's the only bit they might be able to change. Maybe it's enough of a fig leaf to give cover to a few, but enough are clear the problems are the legal text so i doubt it. Particularly since everyone knows it's a fig leaf.
May knows she's not getting any meaningful changes. She knew that full well after she got Salzburged a second time last month. Remember people were talking about a special EUCO summit just for Brexit? What happened to that?
The EU is doing the absolute mininum it can to help her. And why would they lift a finger? Since they don't believe she has a snowball's chance in hell getting it through Parliament, they're not going to risk going out on a limb for her, making a meaningful concession, and then she lose anyway.
They could afford to make a concession but I agree it's not in their interest, particularly when me as half of our parliament is working to remain anyway. The EU will not like no deal, but they've gone as far as they care to to prevent it.
They can't give the concession the rebels want, an "end" to the (then mis-named) 'backstop', presumably on No Deal terms.
They are still thinking that the problem is with the political declaration, rather than with the withdrawal agreement itself.
More likely they know it's not but that's the only bit they might be able to change. Maybe it's enough of a fig leaf to give cover to a few, but enough are clear the problems are the legal text so i doubt it. Particularly since everyone knows it's a fig leaf.
May knows she's not getting any meaningful changes. She knew that full well after she got Salzburged a second time last month. Remember people were talking about a special EUCO summit just for Brexit? What happened to that?
The EU is doing the absolute mininum it can to help her. And why would they lift a finger? Since they don't believe she has a snowball's chance in hell getting it through Parliament, they're not going to risk going out on a limb for her, making a meaningful concession, and then she lose anyway.
The EU is not going to offer anything unless there is a real prospect of the one outcome that they really don't want - that of the UK leaving on WTO terms. That means that efforts by the Remain block to sabotage preparations for a WTO exit also sabotage the UK's chances of negotiating something better before we leave.
The number of people who support No Deal now, and the number of people who would support it two months after it came about, if nothing but short-term micro-deals were put in place to mitigate it, is unlikely to be the same.
It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
Why - if we go No Deal and it doesn't work I suspect the Remainer Home Counties will be returning 80+ Lib Dem MPs by itself...
There might be a couple in Surrey. But, not in Kent, Essex, Buckinghamshire, or Hertfordshire.
You know a different part of Buckinghamshire to the areas I know - they are very much remainy. Milton Keynes may not be but Chesham and Amersham, Beaconsfield?
I think this is spot on unless there's a black swan.
As things stand, there's no way for Labour to go up from here: Corbyn is merrily trashing his appeal to centrist-Remainers and showing no sign of winning over former Tory voters.
But who knows what will happen after March 29th. If the whole of Kent becomes one big Operation Stack, or the newspapers find just one child death in hospital as a result of medicine shortages, all bets are off.
Which means we're in a situation where Labour NEED Brexit to happen to get a majority.
Maybe Magic Grandpa isn't so stupid after all.
Morning all,
There has been plenty of speculation and anonymous quotes from 'sources' to the effect that Jezza's closest aides think a massively messy Brexit, owned by the Tories, and the resulting chaos, is the perfect opportunity for them to win.
Indeed. Neither party are acting in the national interest.
Too busy thinking about leadership plans and elections.
Instances where politicians have acted in the national interest over Party interest are as rare as unicorn shit.
May 1940 springs to mind.
1. That was a pretty bloody rare and extreme context; 2. I don't really see that dumping Chamberlain was necessarily acting against the party interest anyway?
Arguably, enabling Churchill to form an all-party coalition was against the short-term narrow interests of the Conservatives but even that's a very arguable call.
The number of people who support No Deal now, and the number of people who would support it two months after it came about, if nothing but short-term micro-deals were put in place to mitigate it, is unlikely to be the same.
It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
If they revoked Brexit *and* slung out the ERG then the Tories would become the de facto new centre party and would take votes from Corbyn's Labour.
Too few.
Most people who vote Labour do so because they admire Corbyn, or they are Labour loyalists.
Really, round here (the North East) most people vote Labour because their Grandparents did - Thatcher then confirmed the choice with the mines...
I think this is spot on unless there's a black swan.
As things stand, there's no way for Labour to go up from here: Corbyn is merrily trashing his appeal to centrist-Remainers and showing no sign of winning over former Tory voters.
But who knows what will happen after March 29th. If the whole of Kent becomes one big Operation Stack, or the newspapers find just one child death in hospital as a result of medicine shortages, all bets are off.
Which means we're in a situation where Labour NEED Brexit to happen to get a majority.
Maybe Magic Grandpa isn't so stupid after all.
Morning all,
There has been plenty of speculation and anonymous quotes from 'sources' to the effect that Jezza's closest aides think a massively messy Brexit, owned by the Tories, and the resulting chaos, is the perfect opportunity for them to win.
Indeed. Neither party are acting in the national interest.
Too busy thinking about leadership plans and elections.
Instances where politicians have acted in the national interest over Party interest are as rare as unicorn shit.
May 1940 springs to mind.
1. That was a pretty bloody rare and extreme context; 2. I don't really see that dumping Chamberlain was necessarily acting against the party interest anyway?
Arguably, enabling Churchill to form an all-party coalition was against the short-term narrow interests of the Conservatives* but even that's a very arguable call.
*And Labour. Today's Labour leadership would be holding out for a GE.
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
I think TM is correct to hold the votes on Tuesday 15th January to draw out the voting records of all mps not only on the deal but the amendments
I expect TM will then return to the EU and challenge them to negotiate to prevent no deal which neither side want.
Whether the EU will, only time will tell but without the votes on the amendments and the deal everything else is just speculation
I note a group of mps are threatening to effectively close down the government in a no deal situation and the ERG are kicking up a fuss. It is remarkable how the ERG think they will succeed in achieving a no deal outcome when over 500 mps are lined up against them
If I was guessing I would expect TM to return to the EU post 15th January, some modifications to the deal will be agreed, then she brings it back to the HOC on a deal or no deal basis. I do not see her agreeing to extend A50 or a referendum or especially to revoke A50
And, as long as she is PM, she is the only person who can lay legislation before the house to delay or revoke A50 or conduct a referendum
Europe (rather, the EU) has been a running sore for the Conservatives for more than thirty years. Both May's deal and no-deal lance that boil. Any other outcome keeps it there as an irritant.
The numb It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
s.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
Why - if welf...
There might be a couple in Surrey. But, not in Kent, Essex, Buckinghamshire, or Hertfordshire.
You know a different part of Buckinghamshire to the areas I know - they are very much remainy. Milton Keynes may not be but Chesham and Amersham, Beaconsfield?
Both were 50/50 and they have Conservative majorities of 22,000 and 24,000.
The number of people who support No Deal now, and the number of people who would support it two months after it came about, if nothing but short-term micro-deals were put in place to mitigate it, is unlikely to be the same.
It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
If they revoked Brexit *and* slung out the ERG then the Tories would become the de facto new centre party and would take votes from Corbyn's Labour.
Too few.
Most people who vote Labour do so because they admire Corbyn, or they are Labour loyalists.
Really, round here (the North East) most people vote Labour because their Grandparents did - Thatcher then confirmed the choice with the mines...
They won't switch to a pro-Brexit Conservative Party.
A reminder that the last round of WTO trade talks, the Doha round, collapse amongst ignominy and infighting eleven years ago, and reform has been completely stalled ever since.
An organization that's effectively been moribund for over a decade is our great white hope.
Far from being moribund, the WTO has been pretty successful in its goal of reducing tariff barriers worldwide to historically low levels. The outcomes are what matters, not the processes leading to those outcomes.
A reminder that the last round of WTO trade talks, the Doha round, collapse amongst ignominy and infighting eleven years ago, and reform has been completely stalled ever since.
An organization that's effectively been moribund for over a decade is our great white hope.
Far from being moribund, the WTO has been pretty successful in its goal of reducing tariff barriers worldwide to historically low levels. The outcomes are what matters, not the processes leading to those outcomes.
Are you sure the drastic reduction in non-tariff barriers isn't more to do with the proliferation of free trade agreements that have happened?
The EU, for example, has over 50 FTAs in force, and we'll be leaving all of them in eleven weeks.
In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
They are still thinking that the problem is with the political declaration, rather than with the withdrawal agreement itself.
More likely they know it's not but that's the only bit they might be able to change. Maybe it's enough of a fig leaf to give cover to a few, but enough are clear the problems are the legal text so i doubt it. Particularly since everyone knows it's a fig leaf.
May knows she's not getting any meaningful changes. She knew that full well after she got Salzburged a second time last month. Remember people were talking about a special EUCO summit just for Brexit? What happened to that?
The EU is doing the absolute mininum it can to help her. And why would they lift a finger? Since they don't believe she has a snowball's chance in hell getting it through Parliament, they're not going to risk going out on a limb for her, making a meaningful concession, and then she lose anyway.
The EU is not going to offer anything unless there is a real prospect of the one outcome that they really don't want - that of the UK leaving on WTO terms. That means that efforts by the Remain block to sabotage preparations for a WTO exit also sabotage the UK's chances of negotiating something better before we leave.
But then, we are used to Remain being sat on the EU's side of the table at these negotiations.
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
Why - if welf...
There might be a couple in Surrey. But, not in Kent, Essex, Buckinghamshire, or Hertfordshire.
You know a different part of Buckinghamshire to the areas I know - they are very much remainy. Milton Keynes may not be but Chesham and Amersham, Beaconsfield?
Both were 50/50 and they have Conservative majorities of 22,000 and 24,000.
The number of people who support No Deal now, and the number of people who would support it two months after it came about, if nothing but short-term micro-deals were put in place to mitigate it, is unlikely to be the same.
It's easy to support No Deal in opposition to something more concrete; it becomes a different matter when No Deal is itself a thing.
Given the mass defections from the Tories to UKIP or a new Farage led party if the Tories revoke Brexit they may not even be second let alone leading the polls.
No Deal is obviously worse than the Deal but still keeps most of the Tory party together
It would reduce the Tory party to a rump of the mad and the bad. Irrelevance beyond the 1997 William Hague's wildest dreams.
Hague still got 160 odd MPs, if they revoke Brexit the Tories risk matching the 2 MPs the Progressive Conservatives in Canada got in 1993
If they revoked Brexit *and* slung out the ERG then the Tories would become the de facto new centre party and would take votes from Corbyn's Labour.
Too few.
Most people who vote Labour do so because they admire Corbyn, or they are Labour loyalists.
Really, round here (the North East) most people vote Labour because their Grandparents did - Thatcher then confirmed the choice with the mines...
They won't switch to a pro-Brexit Conservative Party.
But neither those areas (the NE and Bucks) are ones which ever decide a GE so the fact that voters won't switch in large numbers is irrelevant. It's the swing seats that matter.
Europe (rather, the EU) has been a running sore for the Conservatives for more than thirty years. Both May's deal and no-deal lance that boil. Any other outcome keeps it there as an irritant.
Sadly, not. The EU (or EEC) has been a dividing line for over sixty years and will continue to be so because: 1. The Conservative tradition includes very strong strands that point to both In and Out; 2. Europe is not going away: it's still just the other side of the Channel / Irish border, and Britain's biggest trading partner; 3. The centre-left don't just advocate rejoining but for many, see it as a defining political identity so the issue isn't going to just retreat to the fringes of national debate.
Europe (rather, the EU) has been a running sore for the Conservatives for more than thirty years. Both May's deal and no-deal lance that boil. Any other outcome keeps it there as an irritant.
Sadly, not. The EU (or EEC) has been a dividing line for over sixty years and will continue to be so because: 1. The Conservative tradition includes very strong strands that point to both In and Out; 2. Europe is not going away: it's still just the other side of the Channel / Irish border, and Britain's biggest trading partner; 3. The centre-left don't just advocate rejoining but for many, see it as a defining political identity so the issue isn't going to just retreat to the fringes of national debate.
The Conservatives could have been re-united on Europe, if a two-speed Europe were created. It has been repeatedly promised and never delivered, and now the well has been poisoned.
We could only wish for such a comparatively steady option.
Well we will see. And quite soon too. Ooooo.
I'll be as disappointed as everybody else if I'm right. What a let down.
But on the other hand here's a thought. Just had it.
If the only negotiated exit from the European Union is unacceptable to the UK, it effectively means that the UK cannot leave the European Union, regardless of the fact that the people of the UK indicated in a referendum that they would like to do so.
Wow. What happened to national sovereignty? Is it another unicorn?
Answer comes there Yes.
Now I am happy with that (I view UK in the EU as both benign and necessary) but I bet I'm in a minority.
We could only wish for such a comparatively steady option.
Well we will see. And quite soon too. Ooooo.
I'll be as disappointed as everybody else if I'm right. What a let down.
But on the other hand here's a thought. Just had it.
If the only negotiated exit from the European Union is unacceptable to the UK, it effectively means that the UK cannot leave the European Union, regardless of the fact that the people of the UK indicated in a referendum that they would like to do so.
Wow. What happened to national sovereignty? Is it another unicorn?
Answer comes there Yes.
Now I am happy with that (I view UK in the EU as both benign and necessary) but I bet I'm in a minority.
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
Yes, I imagine Juncker and Tusk have a whole skip full of magic unicorns ready to roll.
Surely even IDS isn't that naive. The ERG must be working to another plan here. Presumably they want to usher in a Corbyn government so that the socialist ideal can be discredited once and for all. There's no other explanation.
We already have a two-speed Europe. The UK has permanent opt-outs on economic and monetary union, fiscal union, the schengen area, defence co-operation, security and justice co-operation (though we've changed our mind several times on the european arrest warrant and europol) and the applicability of the charter of fundamental rights to UK-only institutions. We also have the budget rebate.
We already have a two-speed Europe. The UK has permanent opt-outs on economic and monetary union, fiscal union, the schengen area, defence co-operation, security and justice co-operation (though we've changed our mind several times on the european arrest warrant and europol) and the applicability of the charter of fundamental rights to UK-only institutions. We also have the budget rebate.
That's pretty damned two-speed IMHO.
The EU was always allowed to deny it, though. If they had come out and said it, I think they would have come across a lot better in the UK.
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
Yes, I imagine Juncker and Tusk have a whole skip full of magic unicorns ready to roll.
Surely even IDS isn't that naive. The ERG must be working to another plan here. Presumably they want to usher in a Corbyn government so that the socialist ideal can be discredited once and for all. There's no other explanation.
It is dreadful but apparently the cps say they are not breaking the law
It was bad enough with the peoples group chanting but this is on a level that is totally unacceptable
You'd be looking at a minimum six-month extension. The referendum itself will take a minimum of 22 weeks. Let's say Thursday 29th June is the earliest possible day we could hold a people's vote. That then leaves the UK and the EU three months to implement the result (whether remain or deal).
Technically, there is nothing to stop May doing that. She could reasonably claim that the HoC rejection of her Deal constitutes approval for revocation 'via democratic process' as required by the ECJ.
She should announce ahead of the vote that that is what she will do if she loses - that will concentrate the ERG's (and indeed Labour leadership's|) minds. Sure her position as leader of the Conservative party will become untenable but wtf - at least No Deal is avoided.
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
Yes, I imagine Juncker and Tusk have a whole skip full of magic unicorns ready to roll.
Surely even IDS isn't that naive. The ERG must be working to another plan here. Presumably they want to usher in a Corbyn government so that the socialist ideal can be discredited once and for all. There's no other explanation.
They absolutely do not want Corbyn
IDS hasn't a clue what the EU will do. He's just making it up as he goes along like the rest of the ERG.
That is precisely why "No Deal" is such a pejorative term - it is intended to shape opinion and lead some by the nose to conclude that chaos would ensue because there would be no arrangements covering even the basics. The choice using non perjorative language is between leaving under "May's Deal" and "World Trade Terms (or WTO Terms for short).
Under the latter, there is an obligation on both the UK and EU to act in good faith to reach basic agreements (i.e. deals) to give effect to their international obligations under the WTO.
"The WTO has done good work in recent years to make it illegal for countries to impose new non tariff barriers to impede trade. The EU has built these requirements into its own law codes. People on both sides of the Channel will continue to honour contracts and buy and sell to each other after our exit. To suggest otherwise is silly scaremongering."
'WTO terms' is utterly meaningless as far as Brexit is concerned. Both sides have to observe WTO rules whether they sign an agreement or not.
No Deal describes our position at the end of March, if no decision is made. It's nothing to do with pejorative opinion shaping; it reflects commercial reality:
Britain’s efforts to manage the withdrawal “are so chaotic that it’s hard for people to be sure there won’t be a [no-deal] Brexit,” Dijk said....
...The Dutch government is scrambling to limit the damage, hiring nearly 1,000 more customs agents for the inspections that would become necessary. The agency, whose officials inspect meat, dairy and animals, is scouring Eastern Europe for veterinarians and giving them crash courses in Dutch because they cannot find enough qualified people at home. And a legion of Dutch farmers and flower growers who take orders from British customers are worried that their supply lines could get tangled in bureaucratic knots...
Or are you sufficiently paranoid to think Rotterdam port officials are part of some Remoaner plot ?
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
Yes, I imagine Juncker and Tusk have a whole skip full of magic unicorns ready to roll.
Surely even IDS isn't that naive. The ERG must be working to another plan here. Presumably they want to usher in a Corbyn government so that the socialist ideal can be discredited once and for all. There's no other explanation.
They absolutely do not want Corbyn
Perhaps the thought is that letting Corbyn wreak havoc for a few years will ensure that no socialist ever gets a hearing again, either in Britain or indeed the rest of the world. They'll be doing mankind a historic favour in exchange for a relatively short period of British misery.
Is there a possibility of an amendment to the MV along the lines of:
"This House approves the WA subject to it also being supported in a referendum of the people"?
Possibly
But wouldn't another referendum require legislation? So, the entire bill would be then dependent on another bill?
What happens if the ammendment passes, but then the referendum bill doesn't? Seems very murky to me.
Yes well, I am sure the amendment could be worded to include something along the lines of:
1. Seek an A50 extension (Revoke if the EU won't agree an extension) 2. Don't leave until the 2nd referendum has been held
If A50 is revoked it has to be done by a Parliamentary mandate and you cannot just serve A50 again to suit UK politics
For a second referendum A50 would have to be extended and the EU have said for the purpose of a referendum they would agree and during the referendum period we would femain. However that then causes great difficulty with the May EU elections as we would have to elect meps
A reminder that the last round of WTO trade talks, the Doha round, collapse amongst ignominy and infighting eleven years ago, and reform has been completely stalled ever since.
An organization that's effectively been moribund for over a decade is our great white hope.
Far from being moribund, the WTO has been pretty successful in its goal of reducing tariff barriers worldwide to historically low levels. The outcomes are what matters, not the processes leading to those outcomes.
The WTO provides a framework of rules within which tariff barriers may be reduced. The process of actually doing so can take years.
If I was guessing I would expect TM to return to the EU post 15th January, some modifications to the deal will be agreed, then she brings it back to the HOC on a deal or no deal basis. I do not see her agreeing to extend A50 or a referendum or especially to revoke A50.
And your guess is quite literally as good as mine, or indeed as bad, because they are one and the same.
Lose (but not terminally), kill the remaining unicorn of the 2nd ref, back to Brussels, pick up some cosmetics, put lipstick on the pig, back to market and offer as now the only alternative to what is not an alternative.
It's utterly irresponsible, it's outrageous, it's verging on blackmail !!!
It also makes perfect sense and is the only way we avoid making a complete nincompoop of the 2016 referendum.
A reminder that the last round of WTO trade talks, the Doha round, collapse amongst ignominy and infighting eleven years ago, and reform has been completely stalled ever since.
An organization that's effectively been moribund for over a decade is our great white hope.
Far from being moribund, the WTO has been pretty successful in its goal of reducing tariff barriers worldwide to historically low levels. The outcomes are what matters, not the processes leading to those outcomes.
The WTO provides a framework of rules within which tariff barriers may be reduced. The process of actually doing so can take years.
In this case, falling back to the WTO will massively, hugely INCREASE the number of tariff and non-tariff barriers on the UK.
Since FTAs usually take 5-10 years to negotiate, we might, with dedicated hard work and a lot of luck, get ourselves back in the same tariff and non-tariff barrier position we were in as EU members with, oooh, let's say 30 years?
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
Yes, I imagine Juncker and Tusk have a whole skip full of magic unicorns ready to roll.
There is nothing either magical or unicorns about kicking the Irish border into the long grass by saying it will be dealt with in the future relationship agreement and that both sides commit to keeping an open border.
Technically, there is nothing to stop May doing that. She could reasonably claim that the HoC rejection of her Deal constitutes approval for revocation 'via democratic process' as required by the ECJ.
She should announce ahead of the vote that that is what she will do if she loses - that will concentrate the ERG's (and indeed Labour leadership's|) minds. Sure her position as leader of the Conservative party will become untenable but wtf - at least No Deal is avoided.
She would be out of office the minute she tried it. The cabinet would demand she goes and, in any respect, it is against everything she has said
Technically, there is nothing to stop May doing that. She could reasonably claim that the HoC rejection of her Deal constitutes approval for revocation 'via democratic process' as required by the ECJ.
She should announce ahead of the vote that that is what she will do if she loses - that will concentrate the ERG's (and indeed Labour leadership's|) minds. Sure her position as leader of the Conservative party will become untenable but wtf - at least No Deal is avoided.
She would be out of office the minute she tried it. The cabinet would demand she goes and, in any respect, it is against everything she has said
I agree with your second point but not the first. All the cabinet could do is resign en masse, they cannot remove her from office (except by supporting a commons VoNC).
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
Yes, I imagine Juncker and Tusk have a whole skip full of magic unicorns ready to roll.
Surely even IDS isn't that naive. The ERG must be working to another plan here. Presumably they want to usher in a Corbyn government so that the socialist ideal can be discredited once and for all. There's no other explanation.
They absolutely do not want Corbyn
IDS hasn't a clue what the EU will do. He's just making it up as he goes along like the rest of the ERG.
You're not a whinging remoaner. Revocation is a reasonable option to take as a means to stop brexit. What it is not is a means to deliver a better brexit at some unspecified future point.
I'd agree with that, too. The idea of revocation as a means of calling time out while we negotiate better arrangements is delusional.
Of course the very easiest way to resolve the NI backstop is unification of Ireland.
As luck would have it, ‘no deal’ looks like it would bring that about. When the deal is voted down, perhaps we should just hold a border poll, then the UK could leave the EU on time by virtue of no longer existing.
Apparently the Yaxley-Lennon fans in Parliament Square also shouted they are going to rape Kay Burley and Anna Soubry with a pole with an EU flag on it.
Technically, there is nothing to stop May doing that. She could reasonably claim that the HoC rejection of her Deal constitutes approval for revocation 'via democratic process' as required by the ECJ.
She should announce ahead of the vote that that is what she will do if she loses - that will concentrate the ERG's (and indeed Labour leadership's|) minds. Sure her position as leader of the Conservative party will become untenable but wtf - at least No Deal is avoided.
She would be out of office the minute she tried it. The cabinet would demand she goes and, in any respect, it is against everything she has said
I agree with your second point but not the first. All the cabinet could do is resign en masse, they cannot remove her from office (except by supporting a commons VoNC).
If a cabinet resign the PM has no choice but resign
Apparently the Yaxley-Lennon fans in Parliament Square also shouted they are going to rape Kay Burley and Anna Soubry with a pole with an EU flag on it.
Just another day in the sunlit uplands.
As I said last night those EDL supporters in Manchester on Saturday were chanting variations of ‘Fuck off, we’re taking back control’ for a reason.
Apparently the Yaxley-Lennon fans in Parliament Square also shouted they are going to rape Kay Burley and Anna Soubry with a pole with an EU flag on it.
Just another day in the sunlit uplands.
Surely that is a criminal offence? Threatening rape?
Why are the police doing nothing? What if Sky employed its own security and pushed them out of the way?
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
Apparently the Yaxley-Lennon fans in Parliament Square also shouted they are going to rape Kay Burley and Anna Soubry with a pole with an EU flag on it.
Just another day in the sunlit uplands.
Surely that is a criminal offence? Threatening rape?
Why are the police doing nothing? What if Sky employed its own security and pushed them out of the way?
I would have a dedicated "protest" zone* and stick Mr Stop Brexit and these Pro Brexit twats together in it. Let them scream and shout at one another in there.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
Apparently the Yaxley-Lennon fans in Parliament Square also shouted they are going to rape Kay Burley and Anna Soubry with a pole with an EU flag on it.
Just another day in the sunlit uplands.
I have been down there a couple of times and can confirm that they are indeed a sub-optimal crew. Worse in the flesh than on TV because of the aroma. I don't see why holding extreme right-wing nationalist views should give a pass on personal hygiene.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
Technically, there is nothing to stop May doing that. She could reasonably claim that the HoC rejection of her Deal constitutes approval for revocation 'via democratic process' as required by the ECJ.
She should announce ahead of the vote that that is what she will do if she loses - that will concentrate the ERG's (and indeed Labour leadership's|) minds. Sure her position as leader of the Conservative party will become untenable but wtf - at least No Deal is avoided.
She would be out of office the minute she tried it. The cabinet would demand she goes and, in any respect, it is against everything she has said
I agree with your second point but not the first. All the cabinet could do is resign en masse, they cannot remove her from office (except by supporting a commons VoNC).
If a cabinet resign the PM has no choice but resign
Listening to IDS on the BBC it is clear ERG expect that by voting against the deal the EU will buckle and offer TM a deal to ERG's liking
Yes, I imagine Juncker and Tusk have a whole skip full of magic unicorns ready to roll.
Surely even IDS isn't that naive. The ERG must be working to another plan here. Presumably they want to usher in a Corbyn government so that the socialist ideal can be discredited once and for all. There's no other explanation.
They absolutely do not want Corbyn
IDS hasn't a clue what the EU will do. He's just making it up as he goes along like the rest of the ERG.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
As a stop-gap. Doesn't solve the issue.
Revocation followed by show trials and mass deportations of gammons to Benidorm.
Apparently the Yaxley-Lennon fans in Parliament Square also shouted they are going to rape Kay Burley and Anna Soubry with a pole with an EU flag on it.
Just another day in the sunlit uplands.
As I said last night those EDL supporters in Manchester on Saturday were chanting variations of ‘Fuck off, we’re taking back control’ for a reason.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
That would be political suicide.Even they are not that daft.
Apparently the Yaxley-Lennon fans in Parliament Square also shouted they are going to rape Kay Burley and Anna Soubry with a pole with an EU flag on it.
Just another day in the sunlit uplands.
Surely that is a criminal offence? Threatening rape?
Why are the police doing nothing? What if Sky employed its own security and pushed them out of the way?
I would have a dedicated "protest" zone* and stick Mr Stop Brexit and these Pro Brexit twats together in it. Let them scream and shout at one another in there.
* I think a Portaloo should do the trick.
In the Parliamentary context, might that not be a Portilloo ?
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
As a stop-gap. Doesn't solve the issue.
Revocation followed by show trials and mass deportations of gammons to Benidorm.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
True but May was pursuing her cherished dream of a special relationship with the EU that the EU were clearly not interested in. That’s one of the reasons why she is unfit for office and has to go.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
As a stop-gap. Doesn't solve the issue.
Revocation followed by show trials and mass deportations of gammons to Benidorm.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
As a stop-gap. Doesn't solve the issue.
Revocation followed by show trials and mass deportations of gammons to Benidorm.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
As a stop-gap. Doesn't solve the issue.
Revocation followed by show trials and mass deportations of gammons to Benidorm.
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
Well we know you are talking bollocks, because until very recently they could not have had that as a reliable option.....
[snip] In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
And with just a few weeks' notice for businesses to completely overhaul their operations. 'Insanity' hardly begins to cover it.
Given that "No Deal" was a potential outcome when the Article 50 notice was served, "insanity" hardly begins to cover the Govt. refusing to plan for it for the past two years.....
The government always had a foolproof no deal plan: revocation.
As a stop-gap. Doesn't solve the issue.
Revocation followed by show trials and mass deportations of gammons to Benidorm.
And who is going to be doing the deporting?
I guess an army of cloned Lord Adonises.
Spain doesn't have enough vets for all that imported gammon.....
Comments
Honestly the most interesting vote 're the deal is Stephen Lloyd's, resigning the party whip to vote for a deal that won't pass no matter what he does, when others previously assumed to be persuadable are coming out against perhaps in part because it's not worth sticking your neck out for a dead deal.
The EU is doing the absolute mininum it can to help her. And why would they lift a finger? Since they don't believe she has a snowball's chance in hell getting it through Parliament, they're not going to risk going out on a limb for her, making a meaningful concession, and then she lose anyway.
Under the latter, there is an obligation on both the UK and EU to act in good faith to reach basic agreements (i.e. deals) to give effect to their international obligations under the WTO.
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2018/08/20/non-tariff-barriers-the-eu-has-to-play-by-wto-rules/
"The WTO has done good work in recent years to make it illegal for countries to impose new non tariff barriers to impede trade. The EU has built these requirements into its own law codes. People on both sides of the Channel will continue to honour contracts and buy and sell to each other after our exit. To suggest otherwise is silly scaremongering."
Most people who vote Labour do so because they admire Corbyn, or they are Labour loyalists.
An organization that's effectively been moribund for over a decade is our great white hope.
2. I don't really see that dumping Chamberlain was necessarily acting against the party interest anyway?
Arguably, enabling Churchill to form an all-party coalition was against the short-term narrow interests of the Conservatives but even that's a very arguable call.
I think TM is correct to hold the votes on Tuesday 15th January to draw out the voting records of all mps not only on the deal but the amendments
I expect TM will then return to the EU and challenge them to negotiate to prevent no deal which neither side want.
Whether the EU will, only time will tell but without the votes on the amendments and the deal everything else is just speculation
I note a group of mps are threatening to effectively close down the government in a no deal situation and the ERG are kicking up a fuss. It is remarkable how the ERG think they will succeed in achieving a no deal outcome when over 500 mps are lined up against them
If I was guessing I would expect TM to return to the EU post 15th January, some modifications to the deal will be agreed, then she brings it back to the HOC on a deal or no deal basis. I do not see her agreeing to extend A50 or a referendum or especially to revoke A50
And, as long as she is PM, she is the only person who can lay legislation before the house to delay or revoke A50 or conduct a referendum
"This House approves the WA subject to it also being supported in a referendum of the people"?
The EU, for example, has over 50 FTAs in force, and we'll be leaving all of them in eleven weeks.
In fact, a no-deal crash out will see the single largest *increase* in both tariff and non-tariff barriers in the entire history of the WTO.
1. The Conservative tradition includes very strong strands that point to both In and Out;
2. Europe is not going away: it's still just the other side of the Channel / Irish border, and Britain's biggest trading partner;
3. The centre-left don't just advocate rejoining but for many, see it as a defining political identity so the issue isn't going to just retreat to the fringes of national debate.
I'll be as disappointed as everybody else if I'm right. What a let down.
But on the other hand here's a thought. Just had it.
If the only negotiated exit from the European Union is unacceptable to the UK, it effectively means that the UK cannot leave the European Union, regardless of the fact that the people of the UK indicated in a referendum that they would like to do so.
Wow. What happened to national sovereignty? Is it another unicorn?
Answer comes there Yes.
Now I am happy with that (I view UK in the EU as both benign and necessary) but I bet I'm in a minority.
They will presumably re-table for the forthcoming vote. Could it gather sufficient votes to pass?
What happens if the ammendment passes, but then the referendum bill doesn't? Seems very murky to me.
That's pretty damned two-speed IMHO.
1. Seek an A50 extension (Revoke if the EU won't agree an extension)
2. Don't leave until the 2nd referendum has been held
It was bad enough with the peoples group chanting but this is on a level that is totally unacceptable
https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1081864776391839744
Technically, there is nothing to stop May doing that. She could reasonably claim that the HoC rejection of her Deal constitutes approval for revocation 'via democratic process' as required by the ECJ.
She should announce ahead of the vote that that is what she will do if she loses - that will concentrate the ERG's (and indeed Labour leadership's|) minds. Sure her position as leader of the Conservative party will become untenable but wtf - at least No Deal is avoided.
Half of the left would also be trouble throwing the word 'Nazi' around.
No Deal describes our position at the end of March, if no decision is made.
It's nothing to do with pejorative opinion shaping; it reflects commercial reality:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/the-dutch-love-to-plan-but-even-they-may-not-be-able-to-avoid-the-chaos-of-a-no-deal-brexit/2019/01/06/4492f7da-020a-11e9-958c-0a601226ff6b_story.html
“Everyone is fully aware that something is going to happen,” said Mark Dijk, the head of external relations at the Port of Rotterdam, whose docks, rail yards and warehouses handle nearly 1 million tons of goods moving to and from Britain every week. The port has been working on Brexit emergency plans for more than a year and is trying to alert businesses that they need to brace for a wave of restrictions.
Britain’s efforts to manage the withdrawal “are so chaotic that it’s hard for people to be sure there won’t be a [no-deal] Brexit,” Dijk said....
...The Dutch government is scrambling to limit the damage, hiring nearly 1,000 more customs agents for the inspections that would become necessary. The agency, whose officials inspect meat, dairy and animals, is scouring Eastern Europe for veterinarians and giving them crash courses in Dutch because they cannot find enough qualified people at home. And a legion of Dutch farmers and flower growers who take orders from British customers are worried that their supply lines could get tangled in bureaucratic knots...
Or are you sufficiently paranoid to think Rotterdam port officials are part of some Remoaner plot ?
For a second referendum A50 would have to be extended and the EU have said for the purpose of a referendum they would agree and during the referendum period we would femain. However that then causes great difficulty with the May EU elections as we would have to elect meps
The process of actually doing so can take years.
Lose (but not terminally), kill the remaining unicorn of the 2nd ref, back to Brussels, pick up some cosmetics, put lipstick on the pig, back to market and offer as now the only alternative to what is not an alternative.
It's utterly irresponsible, it's outrageous, it's verging on blackmail !!!
It also makes perfect sense and is the only way we avoid making a complete nincompoop of the 2016 referendum.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46782759
I don't understand, this advert has been running on tv for ages.
Since FTAs usually take 5-10 years to negotiate, we might, with dedicated hard work and a lot of luck, get ourselves back in the same tariff and non-tariff barrier position we were in as EU members with, oooh, let's say 30 years?
The idea of revocation as a means of calling time out while we negotiate better arrangements is delusional.
Just another day in the sunlit uplands.
Why are the police doing nothing? What if Sky employed its own security and pushed them out of the way?
* I think a Portaloo should do the trick.
Par for the course at present. Utter chaos
True but May was pursuing her cherished dream of a special relationship with the EU that the EU were clearly not interested in. That’s one of the reasons why she is unfit for office and has to go.