Always think a PM has lost PMQs when they start asking the LoO questions. Today was a clear example of that when May was asking the LoO for decisions. She is on such a sticky wicket.
I said before the referendum result came in that whoever ended up 'winning' (if we end up staying in, that counts as a Remain win) would see it become Pyrrhic. And that's still true.
Of course the best possible result for UKIP and a new Farage party would be a Remain v Deal referendum, without a No Deal option, which Remain narrowly won.
Leaving with No Deal would ironically be the worst result for UKIP's prospects as they would then be redundant
The one single thing he could do which cements her authority.
You’ve got to hand it to him, the capacity of that man to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is impressive.
Why is that snatching defeat? May is doing a really rather nice job for Corbyn as Tory leader. If she stays longer, he wins. If if he gets a GE, he wins. Either way the thing he doesn't want, an effective Tory leader. is further away.
Wrong, May's Tories lead Corbyn Labour by 6% in the latest Yougov
If we do stay in, we'll form part of the growing awkward squad within the EU, and elect members of the awkward squad to the EU Parliament.
Perhaps they will hold an EU wide referendum in 2020.
Do you wish to eject the UK from membership of the European Union: YES/NO
That would be interesting. Imagine if it produced a narrow NO but in many places it was a landslide for YES.
Where would that leave us?
You could pull a similar trick by holding a UK-wide referendum on "Do you wish to eject Northern Ireland from membership of the UK?".
It would be genuinely funny if we got expelled from the EU, after annoying them once too often.
The EU’s response to any dissent seems to be to double-down on More Europe, and punish the unbelievers.
I’m not convinced that’s going to have a happy ending.
I mean, has it? The process of deeper European integration seems to have ended after Lisbon. The EU realised the hard way that further treaty revisions on that scale are now practically impossible, and has been focused very much the other way, encouraging voluntary cooperation only between those states that wish it.
The EU is moving very much in the direction the UK has always claimed to want.
I said before the referendum result came in that whoever ended up 'winning' (if we end up staying in, that counts as a Remain win) would see it become Pyrrhic. And that's still true.
Of course the best possible result for UKIP and a new Farage party would be a Remain v Deal referendum, without a No Deal option, which Remain narrowly won.
Leaving with No Deal would ironically be the worst result for UKIP's prospects as they would then be redundant
I think most MEPs and UKIP memberswould be more than happy with us leaving with no deal. They are not a party formed hundreds of years ago with the sole aim of winning elections and then clinging on to power.
Well, this is all very exciting and Italian, isn't it. It can't be long before we get fisticuffs inside Parliament and our gilets jaunes outside. Our politics are becoming more and more European even as we leave ... or perhaps not.
Anyway, Ken Clarke, currently one of the few grown ups in Parliament, has said the only thing that matters. If Parliament doesn't want a No Deal departure then it has to revoke Article 50 or vote for the Deal. Since it doesn't want the latter, it has only one choice.
He also said that the point of revoking Article 50 would be to give Britain time to come to a settled and considered view as to what it wanted to do next. Which was rather sweet. I will likely be in my grave before that happens.
All the rest is flim flam.
If A50 is revoked, we'll just revert to blaming the EU for our ills, and complaining about continued political integration.
I’d expect serious domestic political effects too, including splitting and fractionalisation of mainstream parties, turnout at general elections dropping beneath 55%, and very angry public meetings, QT and doors slammed in canvassers faces. Possible low level civil disorder too.
Lots of people will simply switch off politics for good. It will roll over into broader social effects over time too, outside the political arena as agencies of the State lose legitimacy.
I said before the referendum result came in that whoever ended up 'winning' (if we end up staying in, that counts as a Remain win) would see it become Pyrrhic. And that's still true.
Of course the best possible result for UKIP and a new Farage party would be a Remain v Deal referendum, without a No Deal option, which Remain narrowly won.
Leaving with No Deal would ironically be the worst result for UKIP's prospects as they would then be redundant
I think most MEPs and UKIP memberswould be more than happy with us leaving with no deal. They are not a party formed hundreds of years ago with the sole aim of winning elections and then clinging on to power.
Of course they would but that does not change the fact by far the best result to revive UKIP would be a Remain v Deal referendum, without a No Deal option, which Remain narrowly won or the revoking of Article 50.
Kippers and 'Leave means Leavers' could then scream 'betrayal' for evermore
Makes sense for him. When the deal is rejected he can say "well, I did my bit, and voted for the deal. Sadly it was rejected by my Brexiteer colleagues. If they won't support Brexit then I don't see why I should".
He's looking for intellectual cover to go hard remain.
Bercow seems to have pushed it to far this time. His dictatorial concept of how to be a speaker is getting criticism from both sides of the Brexit divide. It would be worrying for democracy if he genuinely thinks he has a greater claim to power than the government.
I don’t think he claiming that at all. His position seems to be that Parliament’s right to express its will on an issue trumps the ability of the Leader of the House to stymie it through procedural rules.
It is a Parliament which is sovereign, and if a majority of the House supports the Speaker, his ruling stands. If it doesn’t, the majority can eject him from the chair.
Yes, he's not one of the rebels. Nearly all the Conservative rebels are doing so from a Leave perspective. I gave details earlier in the thread of the non-Leaver rebels and their perspectives.
There are far more Conservative MPs ready to block a no-deal Brexit though. I'm trying to compile a definitive list of those outside government at the moment.
Makes sense for him. When the deal is rejected he can say "well, I did my bit, and voted for the deal. Sadly it was rejected by my Brexiteer colleagues. If they won't support Brexit then I don't see why I should".
He's looking for intellectual cover to go hard remain.
Alternatively this is a Remainers deal written by and for Remainers so why shouldn't he back it?
Well, this is all very exciting and Italian, isn't it. It can't be long before we get fisticuffs inside Parliament and our gilets jaunes outside. Our politics are becoming more and more European even as we leave ... or perhaps not.
Anyway, Ken Clarke, currently one of the few grown ups in Parliament, has said the only thing that matters. If Parliament doesn't want a No Deal departure then it has to revoke Article 50 or vote for the Deal. Since it doesn't want the latter, it has only one choice.
He also said that the point of revoking Article 50 would be to give Britain time to come to a settled and considered view as to what it wanted to do next. Which was rather sweet. I will likely be in my grave before that happens.
All the rest is flim flam.
If A50 is revoked, we'll just revert to blaming the EU for our ills, and complaining about continued political integration.
I’d expect serious domestic political effects too, including splitting and fractionalisation of mainstream parties, turnout at general elections dropping beneath 55%, and very angry public meetings, QT and doors slammed in canvassers faces. Possible low level civil disorder too.
Lots of people will simply switch off politics for good. It will roll over into broader social effects over time too, outside the political arena as agencies of the State lose legitimacy.
A second ref would be absolute chaos, I'd fully expect more violence towards MPs on both sides and uproar followed by complete disillusionment towards politics from the majority - that's why so view outside the Twitter sphere seem to be supportive of one. I do see May's deal as the only way to avert further chaos (and I say that as someone who finds it very underwhelming).
Makes sense for him. When the deal is rejected he can say "well, I did my bit, and voted for the deal. Sadly it was rejected by my Brexiteer colleagues. If they won't support Brexit then I don't see why I should".
He's looking for intellectual cover to go hard remain.
Alternatively this is a Remainers deal written by and for Remainers so why shouldn't he back it?
That's a strange argument. The deal is terrible. The fact that it was negotiated by a former soft remainer doesn't make it any less so.
The next Lib Dem leader ask a question, with a rather nasty sting in the tail.
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
Let's say fellow travellers. They both want the same things for Brexit.
No, not even that.
The idea that someone who bashed Putin so strongly over the Salisbury attack, and led worldwide condemnation of it (unlike the dishonourable leader of the opposition) is on Putin's side is laughable and nasty.
Well, this is all very exciting and Italian, isn't it. It can't be long before we get fisticuffs inside Parliament and our gilets jaunes outside. Our politics are becoming more and more European even as we leave ... or perhaps not.
Anyway, Ken Clarke, currently one of the few grown ups in Parliament, has said the only thing that matters. If Parliament doesn't want a No Deal departure then it has to revoke Article 50 or vote for the Deal. Since it doesn't want the latter, it has only one choice.
He also said that the point of revoking Article 50 would be to give Britain time to come to a settled and considered view as to what it wanted to do next. Which was rather sweet. I will likely be in my grave before that happens.
All the rest is flim flam.
If A50 is revoked, we'll just revert to blaming the EU for our ills, and complaining about continued political integration.
I’d expect serious domestic political effects too, including splitting and fractionalisation of mainstream parties, turnout at general elections dropping beneath 55%, and very angry public meetings, QT and doors slammed in canvassers faces. Possible low level civil disorder too.
Lots of people will simply switch off politics for good. It will roll over into broader social effects over time too, outside the political arena as agencies of the State lose legitimacy.
A second ref would be absolute chaos, I'd fully expect more violence towards MPs on both sides and uproar followed by complete disillusionment towards politics from the majority - that's why so view outside the Twitter sphere seem to be supportive of one. I do see May's deal as the only way to avert further chaos (and I say that as someone who finds it very underwhelming).
64% of British voterswant a#peoplesvote according to recent polling. Why would they be disillusioned?
The next Lib Dem leader ask a question, with a rather nasty sting in the tail.
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
She might not be on Putin’s side but she’s doing what Putin wants.
Firstly, what do you think Putin wants?
Secondly, she is trying to do what the Great British Public voted for in a legitimate referendum. Putin's interference in that (and personally I think he tried, although I'm unsure if it had a major effect) is essentially irrelevant. What the GBP voted for is what matters - and the real problem lies not with Russian interference, but with leavers' inability to agree.
If we do stay in, we'll form part of the growing awkward squad within the EU, and elect members of the awkward squad to the EU Parliament.
Perhaps they will hold an EU wide referendum in 2020.
Do you wish to eject the UK from membership of the European Union: YES/NO
That would be interesting. Imagine if it produced a narrow NO but in many places it was a landslide for YES.
Where would that leave us?
You could pull a similar trick by holding a UK-wide referendum on "Do you wish to eject Northern Ireland from membership of the UK?".
It would be genuinely funny if we got expelled from the EU, after annoying them once too often.
The EU’s response to any dissent seems to be to double-down on More Europe, and punish the unbelievers.
I’m not convinced that’s going to have a happy ending.
I mean, has it? The process of deeper European integration seems to have ended after Lisbon. The EU realised the hard way that further treaty revisions on that scale are now practically impossible, and has been focused very much the other way, encouraging voluntary cooperation only between those states that wish it.
The EU is moving very much in the direction the UK has always claimed to want.
I don’t agree with that. The core EU institutions are still agitating for further integration and they may be able to convince the EU27 to sign up to even more in May/June, with France and Germany still in the vanguard, subject to the more sceptical Visegrad Governments extracting their pound of flesh.
You could pull a similar trick by holding a UK-wide referendum on "Do you wish to eject Northern Ireland from membership of the UK?".
Or Scotland of course.
The place I get to meet Leavers is the golf club and it's striking how many of them are passionate advocates of Scottish Independence. They also believe that Scotland is only kept afloat by English subsidy.
"So you wish to see Scotland impoverished, chaps, do you?" I've been known to say.
Much sniggering all round.
The Scots of course say we will be impoverished as we will lose North Sea oil on top of Brexit.
I have yet to see a poll of English voters backing Scottish independence though unless reversing Brexit is the only way to keep Scotland in the UK
Most of the benefits of Brexit go to the English except fish. Scotland will suffer from losing EC workers, tourists and access to the EC markets for its food and drink. There is no clear plan to compensate the Scots for these losses. Every week I take an Easyjet from Scotland to Euope. How many of these flights are kept running by EC workers, students and tourists who will no longer come? We look at how Ireland with much fewer natural resources has rebuilt its economy and we wonder.
If I as a Tory voting unionist think that we are going down the wrong road you can be sure there is a problem in Scotland.
The next Lib Dem leader ask a question, with a rather nasty sting in the tail.
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
She might not be on Putin’s side but she’s doing what Putin wants.
Firstly, what do you think Putin wants?
Secondly, she is trying to do what the Great British Public voted for in a legitimate referendum. Putin's interference in that (and personally I think he tried, although I'm unsure if it had a major effect) is essentially irrelevant. What the GBP voted for is what matters - and the real problem lies not with Russian interference, but with leavers' inability to agree.
Putin wants to disrupt his opponents via his support of populist nativist movements everywhere, Brexit being one of these.
Discrediting the establishment, and its organs, is a common objective, but May and the Tories are merely Putins dupes rather than active agents. I am not so sure about some of the others.
You could pull a similar trick by holding a UK-wide referendum on "Do you wish to eject Northern Ireland from membership of the UK?".
Or Scotland of course.
The place I get to meet Leavers is the golf club and it's striking how many of them are passionate advocates of Scottish Independence. They also believe that Scotland is only kept afloat by English subsidy.
"So you wish to see Scotland impoverished, chaps, do you?" I've been known to say.
Much sniggering all round.
The Scots of course say we will be impoverished as we will lose North Sea oil on top of Brexit.
I have yet to see a poll of English voters backing Scottish independence though unless reversing Brexit is the only way to keep Scotland in the UK
Most of the benefits of Brexit go to the English except fish. Scotland will suffer from losing EC workers, tourists and access to the EC markets for its food and drink. There is no clear plan to compensate the Scots for these losses. Every week I take an Easyjet from Scotland to Euope. How many of these flights are kept running by EC workers, students and tourists who will no longer come? We look at how Ireland with much fewer natural resources has rebuilt its economy and we wonder.
If I as a Tory voting unionist think that we are going down the wrong road you can be sure there is a problem in Scotland.
Ireland has sold itself to large multi nats which is great as longn as they stay. It has no real domestic businesses of any significance. Oh and it went almost bust in 2009.
You could pull a similar trick by holding a UK-wide referendum on "Do you wish to eject Northern Ireland from membership of the UK?".
Or Scotland of course.
The place I get to meet Leavers is the golf club and it's striking how many of them are passionate advocates of Scottish Independence. They also believe that Scotland is only kept afloat by English subsidy.
"So you wish to see Scotland impoverished, chaps, do you?" I've been known to say.
Much sniggering all round.
The Scots of course say we will be impoverished as we will lose North Sea oil on top of Brexit.
I have yet to see a poll of English voters backing Scottish independence though unless reversing Brexit is the only way to keep Scotland in the UK
Most of the benefits of Brexit go to the English except fish. Scotland will suffer from losing EC workers, tourists and access to the EC markets for its food and drink. There is no clear plan to compensate the Scots for these losses. Every week I take an Easyjet from Scotland to Euope. How many of these flights are kept running by EC workers, students and tourists who will no longer come? We look at how Ireland with much fewer natural resources has rebuilt its economy and we wonder.
If I as a Tory voting unionist think that we are going down the wrong road you can be sure there is a problem in Scotland.
Well every Scottish constituency voted Remain yes but the only polling showing Yes getting over 50% in any indyref2 tends to be with No Deal
You could pull a similar trick by holding a UK-wide referendum on "Do you wish to eject Northern Ireland from membership of the UK?".
Or Scotland of course.
The place I get to meet Leavers is the golf club and it's striking how many of them are passionate advocates of Scottish Independence. They also believe that Scotland is only kept afloat by English subsidy.
"So you wish to see Scotland impoverished, chaps, do you?" I've been known to say.
Much sniggering all round.
The Scots of course say we will be impoverished as we will lose North Sea oil on top of Brexit.
I have yet to see a poll of English voters backing Scottish independence though unless reversing Brexit is the only way to keep Scotland in the UK
Most of the benefits of Brexit go to the English except fish. Scotland will suffer from losing EC workers, tourists and access to the EC markets for its food and drink. There is no clear plan to compensate the Scots for these losses. Every week I take an Easyjet from Scotland to Euope. How many of these flights are kept running by EC workers, students and tourists who will no longer come? We look at how Ireland with much fewer natural resources has rebuilt its economy and we wonder.
If I as a Tory voting unionist think that we are going down the wrong road you can be sure there is a problem in Scotland.
Ireland has sold itself to large multi nats which is great as longn as they stay. It has no real domestic businesses of any significance. Oh and it went almost bust in 2009.
The next Lib Dem leader ask a question, with a rather nasty sting in the tail.
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
She might not be on Putin’s side but she’s doing what Putin wants.
Firstly, what do you think Putin wants?
Secondly, she is trying to do what the Great British Public voted for in a legitimate referendum. Putin's interference in that (and personally I think he tried, although I'm unsure if it had a major effect) is essentially irrelevant. What the GBP voted for is what matters - and the real problem lies not with Russian interference, but with leavers' inability to agree.
Not just Leavers: all of parliament.
It's certainly true that there were various strands of Leave, advocating different things but as was pointed out at the time, they wouldn't be the ones implementing it. They didn't have a manifesto and didn't need one (that was one of the traps that Remain laid and Leave refused to jump on).
It's the job of the government to interpret that result and for parliament to ratify the interpretation (which is why May should have gone to the Commons at the start and sought its backing for the principles of her Lancaster House speech). ex-Remain MPs need to engage with that as much as Leave ones.
The next Lib Dem leader ask a question, with a rather nasty sting in the tail.
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
She might not be on Putin’s side but she’s doing what Putin wants.
Firstly, what do you think Putin wants?
Secondly, she is trying to do what the Great British Public voted for in a legitimate referendum. Putin's interference in that (and personally I think he tried, although I'm unsure if it had a major effect) is essentially irrelevant. What the GBP voted for is what matters - and the real problem lies not with Russian interference, but with leavers' inability to agree.
Putin wants to disrupt his opponents via his support of populist nativist movements everywhere, Brexit being one of these.
Discrediting the establishment, and its organs, is a common objective, but May and the Tories are merely Putins dupes rather than active agents. I am not so sure about some of the others.
What Putin wants is his opponents weakened. Chaos weakens brilliantly, and hence it's easy to argue that people who are campaigning for chaos by wanting to remain in the EU - against the will of the majority of the public - are being Putin's dupes.
Hence Moran's comment applies as much to herself as it does May.
And I have yet to hear any person wanting us to remain say how they'll sell the EU to the GBP so we won't just be going through this all again in a few years. Putin will be rubbing his hands in glee over that thought.
The next Lib Dem leader ask a question, with a rather nasty sting in the tail.
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
She might not be on Putin’s side but she’s doing what Putin wants.
Firstly, what do you think Putin wants?
Secondly, she is trying to do what the Great British Public voted for in a legitimate referendum. Putin's interference in that (and personally I think he tried, although I'm unsure if it had a major effect) is essentially irrelevant. What the GBP voted for is what matters - and the real problem lies not with Russian interference, but with leavers' inability to agree.
Putin wants to disrupt his opponents via his support of populist nativist movements everywhere, Brexit being one of these.
Discrediting the establishment, and its organs, is a common objective, but May and the Tories are merely Putins dupes rather than active agents. I am not so sure about some of the others.
What Putin wants is his opponents weakened. Chaos weakens brilliantly, and hence it's easy to argue that people who are campaigning for chaos by wanting to remain in the EU - against the will of the majority of the public - are being Putin's dupes.
Hence Moran's comment applies as much to herself as it does May.
And I have yet to hear any person wanting us to remain say how they'll sell the EU to the GBP so we won't just be going through this all again in a few years. Putin will be rubbing his hands in glee over that thought.
The polls show there is no majority for Brexit anymore so the point is mute.
Makes sense for him. When the deal is rejected he can say "well, I did my bit, and voted for the deal. Sadly it was rejected by my Brexiteer colleagues. If they won't support Brexit then I don't see why I should".
He's looking for intellectual cover to go hard remain.
Which is key. He is respecting the right of the referendum to be implemented despite having no respect for the wretched thing itself.
Then leaves him free to advocate Remain - the cleanest of Remains - a WTO Remain if you will - via parliament not via abuse of the people with another you-know-what.
Honest, coherent, principled. Unlike most other MPs in this matter, none of those qualities are beyond our Ken.
The next Lib Dem leader ask a question, with a rather nasty sting in the tail.
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
She might not be on Putin’s side but she’s doing what Putin wants.
Firstly, what do you think Putin wants?
Secondly, she is trying to do what the Great British Public voted for in a legitimate referendum. Putin's interference in that (and personally I think he tried, although I'm unsure if it had a major effect) is essentially irrelevant. What the GBP voted for is what matters - and the real problem lies not with Russian interference, but with leavers' inability to agree.
Putin wants to disrupt his opponents via his support of populist nativist movements everywhere, Brexit being one of these.
Discrediting the establishment, and its organs, is a common objective, but May and the Tories are merely Putins dupes rather than active agents. I am not so sure about some of the others.
What Putin wants is his opponents weakened. Chaos weakens brilliantly, and hence it's easy to argue that people who are campaigning for chaos by wanting to remain in the EU - against the will of the majority of the public - are being Putin's dupes.
Hence Moran's comment applies as much to herself as it does May.
And I have yet to hear any person wanting us to remain say how they'll sell the EU to the GBP so we won't just be going through this all again in a few years. Putin will be rubbing his hands in glee over that thought.
The Sam Harris podcast with the Renée DiResta was very interesting. Despite what CNN etc bang on about, the Russian approach started way before Trump. They built communities of different groups e.g African American Christians, and fostered group think within them. Then they would post links to articles which would outrage them e.g. racist incident or discrimination against Christians.
It was all about emphasising and inflaming issues among different sections of society, in order to cause tension, division, and chaos.
Only later did they start to push Trump / anti-Clinton within these groups.
A second ref would be absolute chaos, I'd fully expect more violence towards MPs on both sides and uproar followed by complete disillusionment towards politics from the majority - that's why so view outside the Twitter sphere seem to be supportive of one. I do see May's deal as the only way to avert further chaos (and I say that as someone who finds it very underwhelming).
Off topic, all the warning signs are there this year (stock markets, trade figures over Christmas) of a fairly imminent global recession.
I hope I’m wrong.
Indeed. I hope you're wrong too. The Brexit recession*.
(*The Global Economic crisis of 2008, was often viewed through a national lens with some unscrupulous people blaming the govt for the whole thing)
It will certainly be blamed on Brexit, even though I think that will have virtually nothing to do with it if the deal passes and the transition period kicks in.
If we crash out to No Deal, it could justifiably be blamed on Brexit.
Off topic, all the warning signs are there this year (stock markets, trade figures over Christmas) of a fairly imminent global recession.
I hope I’m wrong.
Indeed. I hope you're wrong too. The Brexit recession*.
(*The Global Economic crisis of 2008, was often viewed through a national lens with some unscrupulous people blaming the govt for the whole thing)
It will certainly be blamed on Brexit, even though I think that will have virtually nothing to do with it if the deal passes and the transition period kicks in.
If we crash out to No Deal, it could justifiably be blamed on Brexit.
Any recovery can be credited to Brexit too no doubt.
A second ref would be absolute chaos, I'd fully expect more violence towards MPs on both sides and uproar followed by complete disillusionment towards politics from the majority - that's why so view outside the Twitter sphere seem to be supportive of one. I do see May's deal as the only way to avert further chaos (and I say that as someone who finds it very underwhelming).
Of all the options it is by a distance the worst.
A no deal Brexit may have some temporary downsides.
64% of British voterswant a#peoplesvote according to recent polling.
But the % falls drastically when asked if they support any particular one of the various possible formulations of the question(s) for one. None of them gets a majority. Bit like the current parliamentary impasse in that sense.
A second ref would be absolute chaos, I'd fully expect more violence towards MPs on both sides and uproar followed by complete disillusionment towards politics from the majority - that's why so view outside the Twitter sphere seem to be supportive of one. I do see May's deal as the only way to avert further chaos (and I say that as someone who finds it very underwhelming).
Of all the options it is by a distance the worst.
A no deal Brexit may have some temporary downsides.
May's deal could make these downsides permanent.
No Deal Brexit is significantly worse for the economy than May's Deal
Comments
Does sound harrowing. If MG reminded me of my mother-in-law, that would kill my fandom stone dead.
Sound like a couple of reprehensible Les Dawsons, don't we?
The EU’s response to any dissent seems to be to double-down on More Europe, and punish the unbelievers.
I’m not convinced that’s going to have a happy ending.
https://www.twitter.com/sanderwagner/status/1082937470986190848
Leaving with No Deal would ironically be the worst result for UKIP's prospects as they would then be redundant
I truly cannot believe the government was so delusional they thought this would be enough to dislodge the DUP from a rock-solid betrayal narrative.
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1082937112306085889https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1082937112306085889
The EU is moving very much in the direction the UK has always claimed to want.
Lots of people will simply switch off politics for good. It will roll over into broader social effects over time too, outside the political arena as agencies of the State lose legitimacy.
Voting for it even though, as one who opposed the triggering of article 50, he is one of the few who could justifiably vote against.
All hail the Ken.
Kippers and 'Leave means Leavers' could then scream 'betrayal' for evermore
He's looking for intellectual cover to go hard remain.
It is a Parliament which is sovereign, and if a majority of the House supports the Speaker, his ruling stands. If it doesn’t, the majority can eject him from the chair.
There are far more Conservative MPs ready to block a no-deal Brexit though. I'm trying to compile a definitive list of those outside government at the moment.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6572629/Countdown-star-Rachel-Riley-tells-George-Galloway-f-off.html
even if you loathe May, you cannot say she's on Putin's side.
Its almost as if they are clearing the decks for an election.
(currently that is a pot, kettle, black comment by me.)
The idea that someone who bashed Putin so strongly over the Salisbury attack, and led worldwide condemnation of it (unlike the dishonourable leader of the opposition) is on Putin's side is laughable and nasty.
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/yougov-poll-reveals-64-want-second-brexit-referendum_uk_5c1b90fee4b05c88b6f5815f?ncid=other_twitter_cooo9wqtham&utm_campaign=share_twitter&ec_carp=7605531669205855965
Mr. Pulpstar, ahem? Tomorrow?
Secondly, she is trying to do what the Great British Public voted for in a legitimate referendum. Putin's interference in that (and personally I think he tried, although I'm unsure if it had a major effect) is essentially irrelevant. What the GBP voted for is what matters - and the real problem lies not with Russian interference, but with leavers' inability to agree.
If I as a Tory voting unionist think that we are going down the wrong road you can be sure there is a problem in Scotland.
I hope I’m wrong.
Discrediting the establishment, and its organs, is a common objective, but May and the Tories are merely Putins dupes rather than active agents. I am not so sure about some of the others.
(*The Global Economic crisis of 2008, was often viewed through a national lens with some unscrupulous people blaming the govt for the whole thing)
As long as they stay.... a number of the major pharmaceutical companies have been there for half a century:
https://www.siliconrepublic.com/careers/biotech-pharma-companies-ireland
He apologised if anyone was offended.
Like the Brexiteers, they think it's all someone else's fault ...
It's certainly true that there were various strands of Leave, advocating different things but as was pointed out at the time, they wouldn't be the ones implementing it. They didn't have a manifesto and didn't need one (that was one of the traps that Remain laid and Leave refused to jump on).
It's the job of the government to interpret that result and for parliament to ratify the interpretation (which is why May should have gone to the Commons at the start and sought its backing for the principles of her Lancaster House speech). ex-Remain MPs need to engage with that as much as Leave ones.
https://twitter.com/IsabelHardman/status/1082984982027665416
Hence Moran's comment applies as much to herself as it does May.
And I have yet to hear any person wanting us to remain say how they'll sell the EU to the GBP so we won't just be going through this all again in a few years. Putin will be rubbing his hands in glee over that thought.
Cancel the entire shit show.
Then leaves him free to advocate Remain - the cleanest of Remains - a WTO Remain if you will - via parliament not via abuse of the people with another you-know-what.
Honest, coherent, principled. Unlike most other MPs in this matter, none of those qualities are beyond our Ken.
Bercow rules OK
He is not being bullied by the Tories who are Frit
IE Primary Legislation is needed.
It was all about emphasising and inflaming issues among different sections of society, in order to cause tension, division, and chaos.
Only later did they start to push Trump / anti-Clinton within these groups.
If we crash out to No Deal, it could justifiably be blamed on Brexit.
What a waste of space he is.
May's deal could make these downsides permanent.
Cheers.
What a rare thing, to actually feel I'm missing out on interesting things by not watching the Commons.
Edited extra bit: anyway, must be off.