Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn would be taking a huge gamble going into an election so

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited January 11 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn would be taking a huge gamble going into an election so out of step with LAB voters on Brexit

Yesterday in what was billed as his “big Brexit speech” LAB leader Corbyn called for a general election should TMay lose fail to win backing for her Brexit deal in the vote next week. But he’s been far more reluctant to allow Labour to give any backing to the increasing clamours for a specific referendum on the deal.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,855
    Oooh, am I first?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,855
    Well, it appears I am.

    And second too.

    (Let's see if I can make it a threesome.)
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,855
    Yes, I can!
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,855
    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 18,370
    Morning all
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,855
    Quintus, as Mrs J R-M might say.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,809
    Cyclefree said:

    Well, it appears I am.

    And second too.

    (Let's see if I can make it a threesome.)

    No you weren't. I was first. This is an outrage.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,704
    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,974
    fifth
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 22,536
    He might not get as far as an election if he decisively backs Brexit against the wishes of his party membership. The Labour leadership is seriously underestimating the strength of feeling about this.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,287
    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    Not at all - a thread consisting entirely of your conversation with yourself would probably be well above the average fare.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785
    If it came to it I think he'd run on Unicorn+Referendum, which would probably work out OK for him.

    The current line is looking precarious but it probably only has to last another week or two, and if he's lucky he can let "parliament" make the running.

    That said, judging by my twitters there is some sign it's starting to dawn on young left-wingers that Corbyn's 1970s left-wingery isn't just a more defiant version of modern left-wingery, and he doesn't exactly believe in what they do.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 23,704
    On topic I did hear a good chunk of Corbyn's speech on R5. What was clearest about it is that he didn't really want to talk about Brexit at all. He wanted to emphasise all his other traditional memes about how Labour is going to introduce a land of milk and honey with properly funded public services and generous provision of this and that as opposed to those wicked Tories.
    When he did come to address it he remained clear that he wanted to implement the vote but with a Customs Union and a policy of pre-committing the UK to implement whatever nonsense the EU comes up with whatever its effect on international competitiveness, a policy so absolutely ridiculous the government adopted it last night. The rest was we would have done it better and, slightly more fantastically, we still can given the unlimited amounts of time available.

    He very plainly has no interest in the detail of Brexit at all but he will never find a Tory policy that he likes or will vote for.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 24,242
    Only Labour can beat the Tories, so they'll stick with Labour
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,287
    Corbyn's speech was mildly bizarre, as it simultaneously called for a general election, on the grounds the government had failed miserably to deal with the most pressing issue facing the country, while almost pathologically avoiding any substantive suggestions as to what an incoming Labour government might do about it.

    Neither government, nor opposition are in the least bit convincing at the moment.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Mr. B, if only we had socialists in charge, everything would be wonderful.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,035
    Nigelb said:

    Corbyn's speech was mildly bizarre, as it simultaneously called for a general election, on the grounds the government had failed miserably to deal with the most pressing issue facing the country, while almost pathologically avoiding any substantive suggestions as to what an incoming Labour government might do about it.

    Neither government, nor opposition are in the least bit convincing at the moment.

    The government has to be more convincing than the opposition. Free owls is fine atm from Labour.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 671
    Whoops, missed deadline, posted after the whistle on prior thread.

    So, morning all, and I was saying ...

    Did not see TW last night. Looking forward to catching it today.

    I rate Andrew Neil as a broadcaster but if OJ roughed him up a little, well good because he can be quite overbearing at times and overly fond of his 'man of the world' persona. Jones is effective. His 'angry teenager' vibe irritates the old folk, but what he comes out with is often acute and usually worth hearing.

    Taki is a horrible old geezer. Racist, misogynist, classist, you name it. Really ought not to be given a weekly column in anything, let alone the Spectator.

    Liddle? His stuff is racist, no question. And his misogyny is far worse than Taki's. Quite disgraceful attitude towards women. And so mean-spirited his articles are, so awfully mean-spirited. But they are often very funny. I enjoy reading him. The guy has talent.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,855
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Pah! I am entertaining myself buying summer flowering bulbs. And some tulips in the sale, to replace the ones stolen by a new family of exceedingly greedy squirrels, God rot their socks. My first crocus and snowdrops have started flowering.

    Plus my sarcococca confusa, which despite sounding like some sort of STD, is in fact one of the glories of nature. Its English name is Christmas box, it is evergreen, needs minimal care and, at this time of year, has the most highly vanilla scented white flowers, a delightful and strong scent which is so so welcome at this dismal time of year. Every front garden should have one.

    Once that shopping is done - see, I am doing my bit for the economy - I need to stock up on coal, then take down the crib - or Neapolitan presepe, a work of art by comparison to the pathetic cribs sold in this heathen country.

    January - and these particular two weeks - are a miserable time of year. Both my parents died around this time and various other aunts and relatives so when I am not going to remembrance Masses I do stuff that looks forward to spring and light and joy.

    And yesterday I got asked to pitch for a new and interesting piece of work. So despite the gloomy time of year and B*****, I am in quite a good mood and, were you to offer me a coffee with chocolate on top, I would cheerfully accept. No point getting aerated by such things, eh!

    (I draw the line at pineapple on pizza - Hawaian pizza indeed, the very idea. Almost as bad as a chocolate panettone.)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,984
    DavidL said:

    a policy of pre-committing the UK to implement whatever nonsense the EU comes up with

    I really don't think it goes as far as this - The amendment commits us explicitly to not lowering existing standards. Sure the first part of the amendment nudges us to aligning with EU standards but if something completely egregious was come up with solely to hurt us then the UK Gov't could deviate as the amendment deals solely with UK law and does not (As any amendment can not) affect the withdrawal agreement.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,869
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Universal Credit, and Are Andrew Lansley's NHS reforms being binned?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827981

    Did David Cameron have any other brilliant wheezes that might not necessarily pass the test of time?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 6,589
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 6,589
    edited January 11
    Why do we still have three more days for tedious debate on the WA before we get to the real business?

    Is there some genuine democratic imperative for such a long debate (I can't see many people being persuaded to change their minds by argument alone) or is it simply that every MP wants his or her 10 minutes to spout off about it so that they can say "I took part in that historic debate"?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,984

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
    The principle behind UC is fine (Receiving 6 benefit payments as one sum) however the idea to try and cut the benefits bill at the same time as the transposition from seperate benefits to one monthly payment was always going to end up as a mess.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,984
    edited January 11

    Why do we still have three more days for tedious debate on the WA before we get to the real business?

    Is there some genuine democratic imperative for such a long debate (I can't see many people being persuaded to change their minds by argument alone) or is it simply that every MP wants his or her 10 minutes to spout off about it so that they can say "I took part in that historic debate"?

    Just so MPs can grandstand about. Why do so many feel the need to spout off saying precisely the same thing over and over ?
    Restrict the contributions to substantive stuff like Grieve's amendment that actually does something.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,716
    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 18,370

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Universal Credit, and Are Andrew Lansley's NHS reforms being binned?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827981

    Did David Cameron have any other brilliant wheezes that might not necessarily pass the test of time?
    :lol:

    To be fair, both these madcap ideas came from other leading Tories. Cameron didn't seem to ever understand what Lansley was up to.

    Cameron only had one brilliant idea himself. One which Osborne defined as "crazy".

    And we are facing the resulting chaos in a couple of months time.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 8,797
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
    The principle behind UC is fine (Receiving 6 benefit payments as one sum) however the idea to try and cut the benefits bill at the same time as the transposition from seperate benefits to one monthly payment was always going to end up as a mess.
    You've missed one.

    Even if UC created no further hardship at all, it would still serve as a reminder of those living on the bread line.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,974
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Pah! I am entertaining myself buying summer flowering bulbs. And some tulips in the sale, to replace the ones stolen by a new family of exceedingly greedy squirrels, God rot their socks. My first crocus and snowdrops have started flowering.

    Plus my sarcococca confusa, which despite sounding like some sort of STD, is in fact one of the glories of nature. Its English name is Christmas box, it is evergreen, needs minimal care and, at this time of year, has the most highly vanilla scented white flowers, a delightful and strong scent which is so so welcome at this dismal time of year. Every front garden should have one.

    Once that shopping is done - see, I am doing my bit for the economy - I need to stock up on coal, then take down the crib - or Neapolitan presepe, a work of art by comparison to the pathetic cribs sold in this heathen country.

    January - and these particular two weeks - are a miserable time of year. Both my parents died around this time and various other aunts and relatives so when I am not going to remembrance Masses I do stuff that looks forward to spring and light and joy.

    And yesterday I got asked to pitch for a new and interesting piece of work. So despite the gloomy time of year and B*****, I am in quite a good mood and, were you to offer me a coffee with chocolate on top, I would cheerfully accept. No point getting aerated by such things, eh!

    (I draw the line at pineapple on pizza - Hawaian pizza indeed, the very idea. Almost as bad as a chocolate panettone.)
    sarcococca confusa sounds like topical commentary
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 18,370
    Pulpstar said:

    Why do we still have three more days for tedious debate on the WA before we get to the real business?

    Is there some genuine democratic imperative for such a long debate (I can't see many people being persuaded to change their minds by argument alone) or is it simply that every MP wants his or her 10 minutes to spout off about it so that they can say "I took part in that historic debate"?

    Just so MPs can grandstand about. Why do so many feel the need to spout off saying precisely the same thing over and over ?
    Restrict the contributions to substantive stuff like Grieve's amendment that actually does something.
    I was thinking the same yesterday, but then I thought, hold on, each of these MPs represents the area they were elected from, so if all speak then every area has (on its behalf) had some tiny input into the debate.

    I decided that was more important than worrying that they all say the same thing over and over again.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,716
    There is a very useful summary of the parliamentary position on the meaningful vote, including the tabled amendments and the the legal impact of various possibilities, here:

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit

    It's quite detailed and a bit long, but a must-read, I think.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 18,370
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
    The principle behind UC is fine (Receiving 6 benefit payments as one sum) however the idea to try and cut the benefits bill at the same time as the transposition from seperate benefits to one monthly payment was always going to end up as a mess.
    Plus not accepting advice that such a complex IT task requires a great deal of time and pilots and testing etc etc. IDS didn't want to know.
  • NormNorm Posts: 928
    The problem is Labour needs every one of those 23% just to ensure that their current polling figures are reflected in a GE. However the additional floating voters they need to secure an actual majority are more inclined to be supporters of Brexit which creates a particular problem all the time Brexit is at the top of the news agenda. Therefore if a snap GE was to occur in the next few months one suspects they will continue to half-heartedly back Brexit albeit in a modified form where the UK stays in the CU.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 22,536

    There is a very useful summary of the parliamentary position on the meaningful vote, including the tabled amendments and the the legal impact of various possibilities, here:

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit

    It's quite detailed and a bit long, but a must-read, I think.

    That's really helpful, thank you.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,913
    Cyclefree said:

    Well, it appears I am.

    And second too.

    (Let's see if I can make it a threesome.)

    Will Scarlett Johannson be joining you?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 671
    I understand the frustration at Corbyn over Brexit but it seems to me that the line he is taking makes perfect sense. Why commit Labour to anything other than 'the Tories are messing up, we can do better' until he has to? Why not gracefully allow the mess to get worse?

    As regards Labour voters, yes they are overwhelmingly remain. But so long as Labour are softer on Brexit than the Tories, it's hard to see why those votes would move en masse in a pre-Brexit GE. And if the GE is post-Brexit, those who voted Labour purely for pro-Remain reasons are probably lost anyway.

    Also, most of the seats that Labour need to win in order to get into government are in Leave areas. What they do not want to do is fail in that task whilst racking up even bigger majorities in liberal urban Remainia.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 15,088
    I get Mike's point in the leader but what exactly should Labour's policy be? Hold a referendum (with what questions?), and advocate Remain? That's not going to be an easy sell either.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 1,128
    Sean_F said:

    Only Labour can beat the Tories, so they'll stick with Labour

    Not sure, I think I would say that only the Tories can beat the Tories. Then you have to define what Tory now means. I have been a member for about 20 years and I am now really not sure.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 15,088

    He might not get as far as an election if he decisively backs Brexit against the wishes of his party membership. The Labour leadership is seriously underestimating the strength of feeling about this.

    It is quite an amusing irony how Corbyn has suddenly, since becoming leader, become a slave to the Party's manifesto commitment.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 1,128
    off topic, does anyone know whether there have been any indicative polls regarding electoral reform recently? It would be interesting to see whether anyone still believes FPTP still delivers strong stable government, which is it's only real USP.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,035

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
    Far more interesting than UC for B-word purposes is the series of letters just underneath that one which say why Brexit would be a leftwing, socialist-approved good thing to do for the UK.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,716
    edited January 11

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    Well, she can't 'call' it, but she could challenge Corbyn to vote for a GE, and in practice he would have to agree (as in 2017). But why would she do that?

    If there were a GE, the two main parties would be in the curious position that, in an election which is all about Brexit, neither would have a coherent Brexit policy and neither would be able to unite around a manifesto on the subject.

    I don't see it happening in the near future.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 15,088
    Nigelb said:

    Corbyn's speech was mildly bizarre, as it simultaneously called for a general election, on the grounds the government had failed miserably to deal with the most pressing issue facing the country, while almost pathologically avoiding any substantive suggestions as to what an incoming Labour government might do about it.

    Neither government, nor opposition are in the least bit convincing at the moment.

    Yes, but for different reasons. The government is not convincing because it has a policy that is not convincing. The opposition is not convincing because it doesn't even have a policy.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 13,238
    edited January 11

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Universal Credit, and Are Andrew Lansley's NHS reforms being binned?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46827981

    Did David Cameron have any other brilliant wheezes that might not necessarily pass the test of time?
    :lol:

    To be fair, both these madcap ideas came from other leading Tories. Cameron didn't seem to ever understand what Lansley was up to.

    Cameron only had one brilliant idea himself. One which Osborne defined as "crazy".

    And we are facing the resulting chaos in a couple of months time.
    There were lots of things Cameron didn't actually understand, although he thought himself able to understand everything.

    Oh, and Good Morning, one of my gym mornings, so a late log-in here!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,984

    There is a very useful summary of the parliamentary position on the meaningful vote, including the tabled amendments and the the legal impact of various possibilities, here:

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit

    It's quite detailed and a bit long, but a must-read, I think.

    I note it agrees with my interpretation of the Mann amendment.

    This amendment accepts the deal on the condition the Government maintains standards in a number of areas, including employment, environmental protection and health and safety.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146


    There were lots of things Cameron didn't actually understand, although he thought himself able to understand everything.

    The motto of the British political class.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146
    edited January 11


    I don't see it happening in the near future.

    If she thinks that Labour's internal contradictions would unravel harder and faster than the Tories, then she might be tempted. Yes, it will harm her party, but there's a good chance it would harm Labour more.

    But that's a ballsy move. It's not a Mrs May move.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 1,128
    kinabalu said:

    I understand the frustration at Corbyn over Brexit but it seems to me that the line he is taking makes perfect sense. Why commit Labour to anything other than 'the Tories are messing up, we can do better' until he has to? Why not gracefully allow the mess to get worse?

    As regards Labour voters, yes they are overwhelmingly remain. But so long as Labour are softer on Brexit than the Tories, it's hard to see why those votes would move en masse in a pre-Brexit GE. And if the GE is post-Brexit, those who voted Labour purely for pro-Remain reasons are probably lost anyway.

    Also, most of the seats that Labour need to win in order to get into government are in Leave areas. What they do not want to do is fail in that task whilst racking up even bigger majorities in liberal urban Remainia.

    Much of what you say is true, but the main worry as I understand it for the big two is not actually switchers, but stay-at-homers. There will be plenty of people like me who will still vote Tory to keep a much worse prospect out. If Labour had a different leader I might just abstain or even vote Labour for the first time in my life to spite the headbanging loons and self serving narcissists that have so much power in the Tory party
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 15,088

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    TMay can't call it, as I'm quite sure you know.

    I assume you mean "what if TMay tables a motion in the Commons calling for one", which would be an absolutely mad thing for her to do, given the divisions within her own Party, and to which the answer would be some kind of revolt.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 49

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    Well, she can't 'call' it, but she could challenge Corbyn to vote for a GE, and in practice he would have to agree (as in 2017). But why would she do that?

    If there were a GE, the two main parties would be in the curious position that, in an election which is all about Brexit, neither had a coherent Brexit policy and neither would be able to unite around a manifesto on the subject.

    I don't see it happening in the near future.

    Perhaps it depends what 'near future' means. I suppose at the moment that's about the next 12-24 hours, but in some time scales 29 March is the near future, and if we have then left the EU, JC has every reason to work towards an election as he will have achieved his intention of leaving without having to take responsibility for it.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,285
    IanB2 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Pah! I am entertaining myself buying summer flowering bulbs. And some tulips in the sale, to replace the ones stolen by a new family of exceedingly greedy squirrels, God rot their socks. My first crocus and snowdrops have started flowering.

    Plus my sarcococca confusa, which despite sounding like some sort of STD, is in fact one of the glories of nature. Its English name is Christmas box, it is evergreen, needs minimal care and, at this time of year, has the most highly vanilla scented white flowers, a delightful and strong scent which is so so welcome at this dismal time of year. Every front garden should have one.

    Once that shopping is done - see, I am doing my bit for the economy - I need to stock up on coal, then take down the crib - or Neapolitan presepe, a work of art by comparison to the pathetic cribs sold in this heathen country.

    January - and these particular two weeks - are a miserable time of year. Both my parents died around this time and various other aunts and relatives so when I am not going to remembrance Masses I do stuff that looks forward to spring and light and joy.

    And yesterday I got asked to pitch for a new and interesting piece of work. So despite the gloomy time of year and B*****, I am in quite a good mood and, were you to offer me a coffee with chocolate on top, I would cheerfully accept. No point getting aerated by such things, eh!

    (I draw the line at pineapple on pizza - Hawaian pizza indeed, the very idea. Almost as bad as a chocolate panettone.)
    sarcococca confusa sounds like topical commentary
    No, I think that's monkey puzzle ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Araucaria_araucana#Description
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146

    There is a very useful summary of the parliamentary position on the meaningful vote, including the tabled amendments and the the legal impact of various possibilities, here:

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit

    It's quite detailed and a bit long, but a must-read, I think.

    The Benn amendment is truly odd. If it carries (and there's non-insignificant chance it will if Labour support it) it renders the whole meaningful vote meaningless and plunges the whole process into an epistemelogically nebulous space where nobody has any idea whether the deal has been rejected or not.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,716


    I don't see it happening in the near future.

    If she thinks that Labour's internal contradictions would ravel harder and faster than the Tories, then she might be tempted. Yes, it will harm her party, but there's a good chance it would harm Labour more.

    But that's a ballsy move. It's not a Mrs May move.
    Both parties would be split, but it would be worse for the Tories. Would the manifesto promise to implement the deal, or not to implement it? Either way she'd have a very large chunk of current MPs who couldn't support it, unless they can put aside their differences first. But in that unlikely event, we wouldn't need a GE.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,871

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    Well, she can't 'call' it, but she could challenge Corbyn to vote for a GE, and in practice he would have to agree (as in 2017). But why would she do that?

    If there were a GE, the two main parties would be in the curious position that, in an election which is all about Brexit, neither would have a coherent Brexit policy and neither would be able to unite around a manifesto on the subject.

    I don't see it happening in the near future.
    I cannot see TMay while she's still PM calling an early election again. Last time she did that it didn't work out well.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 1,128

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    Well, she can't 'call' it, but she could challenge Corbyn to vote for a GE, and in practice he would have to agree (as in 2017). But why would she do that?

    If there were a GE, the two main parties would be in the curious position that, in an election which is all about Brexit, neither would have a coherent Brexit policy and neither would be able to unite around a manifesto on the subject.

    I don't see it happening in the near future.
    Indeed. Calls for a GE are just more sixth form common room posturing from 2Es Corbyn
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,913
    kinabalu said:

    I understand the frustration at Corbyn over Brexit but it seems to me that the line he is taking makes perfect sense. Why commit Labour to anything other than 'the Tories are messing up, we can do better' until he has to? Why not gracefully allow the mess to get worse?

    As regards Labour voters, yes they are overwhelmingly remain. But so long as Labour are softer on Brexit than the Tories, it's hard to see why those votes would move en masse in a pre-Brexit GE. And if the GE is post-Brexit, those who voted Labour purely for pro-Remain reasons are probably lost anyway.

    Also, most of the seats that Labour need to win in order to get into government are in Leave areas. What they do not want to do is fail in that task whilst racking up even bigger majorities in liberal urban Remainia.

    Except in Scotland.

    While continually fluffing the issue may work (for a time) in England, it won't here.
    Leonard, the SLab leader, given a standard BBC Scotland kid glove interview, was unable to give any coherent answer when asked if Labour would have a position on Brexit in the general election he had just said was necessary to break the Brexit deadlock. If I wasn't invested in the situation, I'd think it tragic that SLab now have a fixed tradition of electing a leader measurably worse than their predecessor. He's worse than Iain Gray ffs!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,716

    There is a very useful summary of the parliamentary position on the meaningful vote, including the tabled amendments and the the legal impact of various possibilities, here:

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/parliament-meaningful-vote-brexit

    It's quite detailed and a bit long, but a must-read, I think.

    The Benn amendment is truly odd. If it carries (and there's non-insignificant chance it will if Labour support it) it renders the whole meaningful vote meaningless and plunges the whole process into an epistemelogically nebulous space where nobody has any idea whether the deal has been rejected or not.
    Yep.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    TMay can't call it, as I'm quite sure you know.

    I assume you mean "what if TMay tables a motion in the Commons calling for one", which would be an absolutely mad thing for her to do, given the divisions within her own Party, and to which the answer would be some kind of revolt.
    Yes, that's what I mean. I'd expect the opposition to vote for it pretty overwhelmingly, so I'd be surprised if there was a big enough rebellion to stop it. Voting against an election isn't a good look.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,716

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    Well, she can't 'call' it, but she could challenge Corbyn to vote for a GE, and in practice he would have to agree (as in 2017). But why would she do that?

    If there were a GE, the two main parties would be in the curious position that, in an election which is all about Brexit, neither would have a coherent Brexit policy and neither would be able to unite around a manifesto on the subject.

    I don't see it happening in the near future.
    I cannot see TMay while she's still PM calling an early election again. Last time she did that it didn't work out well.
    No, it didn't work out too well.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 13,238
    Interesting and thought provoking article in the Guardian this morning, especially for those hoping for impeachment before the next election.
    ‘Brought to Jesus’: the evangelical grip on the Trump administration
    The influence of evangelical Christianity is likely to become an important question as Trump finds himself dependent on them for political survival'

    There is apparently a film which is becoming popular, especially in the Bible Belt,The Trump Prophecy, a religious film screened in 1,200 cinemas around the country in October, depicting a retired firefighter who claims to have heard God’s voice, saying: “I’ve chosen this man, Donald Trump, for such a time as this.”

    Some leading evangelicals see Trump as a latterday King Cyrus, the sixth-century BC Persian emperor who liberated the Jews from Babylonian captivity.

    Takes 'praying together' to a whole new level.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,287

    I get Mike's point in the leader but what exactly should Labour's policy be? Hold a referendum (with what questions?), and advocate Remain? That's not going to be an easy sell either.

    Well that's really up to Labour, isn't it ?
    What is not credible is calling for a general election to settle the matter, in the absence of any such policy.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 15,088

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    TMay can't call it, as I'm quite sure you know.

    I assume you mean "what if TMay tables a motion in the Commons calling for one", which would be an absolutely mad thing for her to do, given the divisions within her own Party, and to which the answer would be some kind of revolt.
    Yes, that's what I mean. I'd expect the opposition to vote for it pretty overwhelmingly, so I'd be surprised if there was a big enough rebellion to stop it. Voting against an election isn't a good look.
    That's true, and it would put Con MPs in an invidious position. However, I do think that there's a good argument against a general election *at this time* i.e. when a campaign would take 80%+ of the time between now and Brexit Day.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 8,176
    edited January 11
    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 671
    edited January 11

    Much of what you say is true, but the main worry as I understand it for the big two is not actually switchers, but stay-at-homers. There will be plenty of people like me who will still vote Tory to keep a much worse prospect out. If Labour had a different leader I might just abstain or even vote Labour for the first time in my life to spite the headbanging loons and self serving narcissists that have so much power in the Tory party

    Yes, and that speaks not so much to Brexit but to the Corbyn Ceiling. That idea that with him as leader Labour will not, even in the most favourable of circumstances, get over the line in a general election.

    That feels right to me. Hope not, since I want a Labour government with some appetite for change, but it does feel right.

    Question is, is it the man or is it the agenda? If it's the man, great, because then the answer is obvious.

    But if it's the Left agenda that has a Ceiling too low to win power, I would find that dispiriting.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,968
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
    The principle behind UC is fine (Receiving 6 benefit payments as one sum) however the idea to try and cut the benefits bill at the same time as the transposition from seperate benefits to one monthly payment was always going to end up as a mess.
    There are some specific details of the implementation that are arbitrary and Kafkaesque and manage to cause real hardship without saving that much money. But this is more to do with a lack of oversight of the details of the IT implementation than anything fundamental to do with the policy.

    Still, how did someone not notice that people being paid on a weekly basis were going to have issues with a system that looked at their pay on a calendar month basis? It's not that hard to annualise the calculations.

    It's not good enough for Rudd to talk about running another pilot when there are so many well-known problems with the system as it exists now for the large number of people already using it.

    I can't help but look at it in tandem with the extreme incompetence of the Home Office in relation to immigration and asylum cases, or Student Finance England, and conclude that arbitrary incompetence is a deliberate policy to discourage people from accessing the support policy entitles them to.

    I'm sure the Home Office are hoping that several tens of thousands of EU citizens resident in the UK will decide that the settled status process is too much trouble to bother with and leave the country by preference.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,984

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 8,797
    Signs that TM is winning enough rebels over to keep the defeat to survivable

    Still a long way off enough to win the vote...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,035
    edited January 11

    On topic: Since Corbyn has absolutely no intention of trying to trigger a GE, it doesn't really matter what his policy is.

    What if TMay calls it?
    Well, she can't 'call' it, but she could challenge Corbyn to vote for a GE, and in practice he would have to agree (as in 2017). But why would she do that?

    If there were a GE, the two main parties would be in the curious position that, in an election which is all about Brexit, neither would have a coherent Brexit policy and neither would be able to unite around a manifesto on the subject.

    I don't see it happening in the near future.
    I cannot see TMay while she's still PM calling an early election again. Last time she did that it didn't work out well.
    No, it didn't work out too well.
    Interesting that the IoG is reading the Swire amendment as indeed giving parliament a veto over the backstop.

    Contrary to your interpretation yesterday.

    Edit: I don't point that latter out to be snitty!!
  • Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 13,238

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
    The principle behind UC is fine (Receiving 6 benefit payments as one sum) however the idea to try and cut the benefits bill at the same time as the transposition from seperate benefits to one monthly payment was always going to end up as a mess.
    There are some specific details of the implementation that are arbitrary and Kafkaesque and manage to cause real hardship without saving that much money. But this is more to do with a lack of oversight of the details of the IT implementation than anything fundamental to do with the policy.

    Still, how did someone not notice that people being paid on a weekly basis were going to have issues with a system that looked at their pay on a calendar month basis? It's not that hard to annualise the calculations.

    It's not good enough for Rudd to talk about running another pilot when there are so many well-known problems with the system as it exists now for the large number of people already using it.

    I can't help but look at it in tandem with the extreme incompetence of the Home Office in relation to immigration and asylum cases, or Student Finance England, and conclude that arbitrary incompetence is a deliberate policy to discourage people from accessing the support policy entitles them to.

    I'm sure the Home Office are hoping that several tens of thousands of EU citizens resident in the UK will decide that the settled status process is too much trouble to bother with and leave the country by preference.
    Old Age Pensions, if paid by direct debit, are paid 13 times per year, ie. every four weeks. So the system exists with Whitehall.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,913
    Re. Trump's latest foray into history, I'd have thought the wall predated the wheel by several millenia?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,371
    Since the people voted to Leave in the last referendum if there were another referendum it would be on which version of Leave the people wanted such as May's Deal or No Deal.

    However even May's deal s not definitive since the future relationship is yet to be negotiated.

  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146
    I know the FTPA requires the government to establish a committee to examine the operation of the act and bring forward proposals for its amendment or repeal before the end of 2020, but I have a feeling we might be seeing it get its comeuppance before that.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 22,536

    Re. Trump's latest foray into history, I'd have thought the wall predated the wheel by several millenia?

    2019's version of the chicken and the egg.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,775

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
    Thats only possible with a GE or a 2nd referendum....

    which is it?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,035

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
    Thats only possible with a GE or a 2nd referendum....

    which is it?
    An extension of A50.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 8,176
    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    I was hoping someone might have an idea! It seems to be correcting itself now.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
    That's big of them but it's not within their power to grant.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    I was hoping someone might have an idea! It seems to be correcting itself now.
    Probably the Bloomberg rumour that Cabinet wants to extend A50.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 8,176
    There was a bit matched at 8! Leaving orders up can be lucrative, though it's a risky game to play.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 6,775
    TOPPING said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
    Thats only possible with a GE or a 2nd referendum....

    which is it?
    An extension of A50.
    We can't extend it unilaterally. We can revoke it.

    Whats the point of exending it unless the policy changes?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,545
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Oh, come on chaps. This is getting boring now.

    We were still having an interesting chat about the latest U turn on Universal Credit on the previous thread. No doubt you can entertain us all now that we are here.
    Re UC today's Guardian letters page makes salutary reading. Having retired to relatively comfortable welloffness (new word?) I find it easy to forget how hard life is for some people.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tone/letters
    The principle behind UC is fine (Receiving 6 benefit payments as one sum) however the idea to try and cut the benefits bill at the same time as the transposition from seperate benefits to one monthly payment was always going to end up as a mess.
    The principle goes against 'nudge' research. If you give people a sum of money and say it is for X purpose then people tend towards spending it on that purpose even if intellectually we know money is fungible - so child benefit gets spent on items for children etc.

    UC bundling it all together into a single cash payment makes it less likely to be spent on its intended purpose.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 8,176

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
    Ah, thanks, quoting the Standard. To be honest that looks more like theatre designed to focus minds than a definitive prediction, but reasonable that it should move the market.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-to-be-delayed-beyond-march-29-cabinet-ministers-reveal-a4036326.html

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,035
    edited January 11

    TOPPING said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
    Thats only possible with a GE or a 2nd referendum....

    which is it?
    An extension of A50.
    We can't extend it unilaterally. We can revoke it.

    Whats the point of exending it unless the policy changes?
    We can extend it unilaterally if there is a substantive development which, if they are going to delay, could only be a referendum. Or a GE god help us.

    I mean it sounds bonkers. It all sounds bonkers. The EU wouldn't accept a delay just to let a handful more Cons rebels fall into line, and TMay would surely not think that an extra month or three would be enough to convince them. So that means GE or referendum. Which also sounds bonkers.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146
    Caution, though: the source of the Bloomberg rumour is the Evening Standard, and we all know George Osborne is a messy shit-stirring bitch.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 16,035
    https://bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-11/u-k-s-rudd-won-t-say-if-she-d-quit-over-no-deal-brexit-update

    Yes they will no they won't. This is the news report. Updated just now.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 10,545

    kinabalu said:

    I understand the frustration at Corbyn over Brexit but it seems to me that the line he is taking makes perfect sense. Why commit Labour to anything other than 'the Tories are messing up, we can do better' until he has to? Why not gracefully allow the mess to get worse?

    As regards Labour voters, yes they are overwhelmingly remain. But so long as Labour are softer on Brexit than the Tories, it's hard to see why those votes would move en masse in a pre-Brexit GE. And if the GE is post-Brexit, those who voted Labour purely for pro-Remain reasons are probably lost anyway.

    Also, most of the seats that Labour need to win in order to get into government are in Leave areas. What they do not want to do is fail in that task whilst racking up even bigger majorities in liberal urban Remainia.

    Except in Scotland.

    While continually fluffing the issue may work (for a time) in England, it won't here.
    Leonard, the SLab leader, given a standard BBC Scotland kid glove interview, was unable to give any coherent answer when asked if Labour would have a position on Brexit in the general election he had just said was necessary to break the Brexit deadlock. If I wasn't invested in the situation, I'd think it tragic that SLab now have a fixed tradition of electing a leader measurably worse than their predecessor. He's worse than Iain Gray ffs!
    I miss the days when SNP supporters were living in fear of Jim Murphy.
  • Sean_F said:

    Only Labour can beat the Tories, so they'll stick with Labour

    Not if he enables Brexit. I didn't vote Labour at the last election because my MP, John Cryer, was pro-Brexit (very unusually for a London MP.) Now I live in the Cotswolds and my MP, Laurence Robertson, is an extreme Brexiteer so no problem with my vote next time around.

    But wtf is all this GE nonsense? The Country doesn't want a GE. It wants a resolution to Brexit, and views on how to do so cross party-lines.

    On the single most significant political issue of the century, Corbyn has been a bystander, an irrelevance. Nobody is listening to him.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,809

    Caution, though: the source of the Bloomberg rumour is the Evening Standard, and we all know George Osborne is a messy shit-stirring bitch.

    I'm sure he keeps his multiple professional lives separate...
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 22,536

    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Bloomberg reporting that the Cabinet has agreed to postpone Brexit past March 29th
    Ah, thanks, quoting the Standard. To be honest that looks more like theatre designed to focus minds than a definitive prediction, but reasonable that it should move the market.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-to-be-delayed-beyond-march-29-cabinet-ministers-reveal-a4036326.html

    Thanks - I've added Amber Rudd to my list of confirmed Conservative MP no deal dissidents. The figure is now up to 36.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146
    tlg86 said:

    Caution, though: the source of the Bloomberg rumour is the Evening Standard, and we all know George Osborne is a messy shit-stirring bitch.

    I'm sure he keeps his multiple professional lives separate...
    He takes his role very seriously. His role, of course, is to use the Standard front page to kick Theresa May while she's down on a near daily basis.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 20,716
    TOPPING said:

    Interesting that the IoG is reading the Swire amendment as indeed giving parliament a veto over the backstop.

    Contrary to your interpretation yesterday.

    Edit: I don't point that latter out to be snitty!!

    No, that's not what they say. It would give parliament a veto on whether to implement the backstop in UK law. That's meaningless, parliament could always refuse to implement it in UK law, just as it can refuse to implement the UK regulations required under any international treaty. That would of course put the UK in breach of its international obligations, but the ability to do so is not increased by the Swire amendment.

    Still, if if makes MPs feel happier about agreeing the deal, then great.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,974

    Since the people voted to Leave in the last referendum if there were another referendum it would be on which version of Leave the people wanted such as May's Deal or No Deal.

    However even May's deal s not definitive since the future relationship is yet to be negotiated.

    No, it would be on whether we wish to proceed now we have a proposition
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 24,242

    Sean_F said:

    Only Labour can beat the Tories, so they'll stick with Labour

    Not if he enables Brexit. I didn't vote Labour at the last election because my MP, John Cryer, was pro-Brexit (very unusually for a London MP.) Now I live in the Cotswolds and my MP, Laurence Robertson, is an extreme Brexiteer so no problem with my vote next time around.

    But wtf is all this GE nonsense? The Country doesn't want a GE. It wants a resolution to Brexit, and views on how to do so cross party-lines.

    On the single most significant political issue of the century, Corbyn has been a bystander, an irrelevance. Nobody is listening to him.
    I still think that things like Universal Credit and austerity motivate Labour voters more than Brexit does.

    I'd be interested for Labour posters' views.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Punters smelling the coffee?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 22,536
    If there were a referendum without a Remain option at a time when Remain was polling at least as well as both Leave options put together, that really would be a democratic outrage.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146

    TOPPING said:

    Interesting that the IoG is reading the Swire amendment as indeed giving parliament a veto over the backstop.

    Contrary to your interpretation yesterday.

    Edit: I don't point that latter out to be snitty!!

    No, that's not what they say. It would give parliament a veto on whether to implement the backstop in UK law. That's meaningless, parliament could always refuse to implement it in UK law, just as it can refuse to implement the UK regulations required under any international treaty. That would of course put the UK in breach of its international obligations, but the ability to do so is not increased by the Swire amendment.

    Still, if if makes MPs feel happier about agreeing the deal, then great.
    Imagine though (unlikely, I admit) that is amendment convinced enough Brexiteers to hold their nose and support the deal thinking that they had a veto on the backstop.

    Then the bill to implement the WA comes forward, and the bill makes quite clear they have no such power at all, and that the text of the WA is entirely unchanged.

    I'm sure her party would just quietly let it slide that she won the MV by befuddling her more gullible colleagues with some legal legerdemain.

    It's yet more evidence that May's time window for thinking about the consequence of her actions is simply "will it help me survive the next 24 hours?"
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 15,088
    Pulpstar said:

    Big move against March Brexit in the last hour - 3.1 out to 4.5 on Betfair.

    Why ?
    Increasing noises from the govt that Brexit implementation legislation cannot be passed by March 29.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 5,936
    edited January 11


    But wtf is all this GE nonsense? The Country doesn't want a GE. It wants a resolution to Brexit,

    :+1: :+1:

    Too many politicians see brexit as an opportunity to further their own agendas. They don't give a d*mn about brexit
This discussion has been closed.